Is Javed Ghamidi a True Scholar?

Respectfully to a seeker who stumbled upon my blog through the search string: “Is Javed Ahmed Ghamdi a true Islamic scholar”.

It has been narrated that Awzai (the Syrian jurist), who was a contemporary of Abu Hanifa, once asked Abdullah Ibn Mubarak, “Have you heard about the innovator from Kufa whose kunyah is Abu Hanifa”.

Ibn Mubarak ignored his question and started narrating complicated jurisprudential issues, the juridic opinions regarding those and the fine deductive reasoning leading to those opinions.

“Whose fatawa are these?,” Awzai asked, after hearing him with interest .

“I met him in Iraq” Ibn Mubarak replied.

“He is surely a great scholar. I would some day meet him and learn from him,” Awzai said.

“He is Abu Hanifa,” Ibn Mubarak told him.

We have come a long way since those pre-modern times and like everything else, grapevine has been evolved considerably and transformed into a pseudo-conventional medium of attaining knowledge. It has now become customary in the cyber world to do cursory homework on scholars and jump upon the task of writing and discussing. But even though surfing can give you a lot to chew over, it cannot be an alternative for traditional methods of judging veracity and credibility of scholars.

As I suggested in the past, it is better to spend time in reading the scholars themselves, rather than gathering all the meat from those who have criticized them; sometimes derisively and in harshest of the ways. And I am not overreacting, as one of the search parameters in question, besides pointing to my rambles, retrieves links where Javed Ahmad Ghamidi is called a liar, cheat, fitna and even shaitan (the devil).

There is nothing more heartrending than ignorance.

I do not intend presently to do an extended entry on Ghamidi’s works or methodology and feel it enough to assert that his life and work represents a deeply rooted quest of knowledge. Even if one disagrees completely with whatever he has produced, his truthfulness and purity of intent is extremely hard to miss and these traits are very well embedded in the tradition of thought that he cherishes, carries and channels forward. The wikipedia entry, though helpful in directing towards many important resources, cannot obviously point towards this valuable tradition. Ghamidi himself calls it Dabistaan-e-Shibli (the school of Shibli) in one of his essays. I just aim to limn this tradition for those who don’t know.

Two distinct and usually rival currents of Islamic thought, i.e. traditionalist and modernist, can be identified in the Muslim Subcontinent since its exposure to western civilisation in the 19th Century.

Those who identified themselves with the traditionalist stream primarily contended that religion cannot be re-interpreted and reformed beyond the canons of their respective traditions and any enquiry into religious sources, i.e. Quran and Sunnah, must not remain independent of tradition. A logical byproduct was an attitude that willfully disregarded all the western methods of education, the categories of education itself and ultimately shaped a weltanschauung that was completely ignorant of modern socio-political philosophies. Great scholars like Qasim Nanotwi, Rashid Ahmed Gangohi, Mahmood ul Hasan Deobandi, Anwar Shah Kashmiri and Ashraf Ali Thanwi were torchbearers of this school of thought. A religious seminary in Deoband was established to uphold this tradition and disseminate its contents to next generations.

The Modernist School, as opposed to the traditionalist one, virtually set aside most of the tradition – at least in theory – and went about reforming Islam from scratch. Syed Ahmad Khan, who is arguably the pioneer of Modernist Movement in Subcontinent, established a school in Aligarh in order to introduce modern fields of study and impart education on a relatively progressive curriculum, never adopted previously in Muslim India. Aligarh movement was successful to a great extent and produced few notable scholars, for instance Syed Ameer Ali.

Shibli Nomani (1857 – 1914) brought forth a third current of religious thought in contrast to the above two. This third dimension, though progressive and revivalistic, claimed to carry the burden of tradition as well. Those who associated themselves with it, felt the need to go back to original sources and interact directly with Quran, as it was revealed in history, while trying not to be anachronic. Shibli was undoubtedly the first voice in Subcontinent asserting the need for modernisation of speculative theology (Jadeed ilm al-kalam). It can arguably be contended that Sulayman Nadwi, Abul Kalam Azad, Mawdudi, Muhammad Iqbal and Abdul Majid Daryabadi remained associated with this school of thought in one way or the other.

However, Hameedudin Farahi (a comparatively less known scholar from Azamgarh) can be called the ideal manifestation of this doctrine and the only one dedicating his life in establishing and articulating the canons of this new methodology which was supposed to be rooted firmly in the language of Quran. His student Ameen Ahsan Islahi carried forward the project of his mentor and climaxed it in the form of Tadabbur-i-Quran. Javed Ahmad Ghamdi remained under the tutelage of Islahi for a large part of his life and worked with him on various intellectual projects.

Islahi is no more, but Dabistan-e-Shibli still continue to live in the form of Javed Ahmad Ghamdi and others who have been learning directly and indirectly from him. It is only after drinking from the fountain of this tradition that you can judge about the veracity or mendacity of those who belong to it. No amount of googling can do it for you.

Post navigation

178 thoughts on “Is Javed Ghamidi a True Scholar?”

Speaking of Ahsan Eslahi, the mentor of Ghamdi, He’s the same person who had issues with Surah feel as His mind was not accepting that Ababeels could throw stones and he rather said that it were Qureshis who actually threw stones. Something similar issue was mr.Sir Syed who didn’t believe in Jinn despite of their mention in Quran. In short this cabal prefers logic over Allah’s “Kun”.

Both Ghamdi and Modudi were students of Ahsan Eslahi sahab. Modudi wrote several blasphemous things in his books. Ghamdi is a bit reserve and doesn’t openly react like his friend but do inject his thoughts in Islamic teachings by saying “Hamary Mutabiq ye youn hay”[according to me,it’s like that] which is very harmful thing. Ghamdi also raise point over the authenticy of celebrities like Ayesha[RA] and Omar[RA] over hadiths.

Regardless of what does he want to preach in name of Islam,it’s intresting to see that ghamdi came out as a scholar for Liberal muslims while his friend modudi rather earned name as a member of Jamat-e-Islami which is right wing political party.

assalamu alay’kum Brother Adnan,He’s the same person who had issues with Surah feel as His mind was not accepting that Ababeels could throw stones and he rather said that it were Qureshis who actually threw stones.
Is that something too awkward in itself? Your comment leads me to infer that Islahi’s only proof for his position on ‘throwing stones’ was his whims. I think that is not a fair enough POV to have. He has explained his views clearly in the exegesis of Surah Fil in Tadabbut-e-Quran. Fortunately it has been translated by Shahzad Saleem and can be read here.

Read it, try refuting it and I’ll accept it as fair criticism. Frankly speaking, I myself agree with the traditional position in this regard but that doesn’t mean I have the right to doubt somebody’s intention.

Thats the whole point of my post. Muslims should be responsible enough to learn the dynamics of technical criticism and rise above emotionality.

In short this cabal prefers logic over Allah’s “Kun”.
Going with this simplistic opinion, Islahi should also have negated the Jinn and explain it as some physical force. People who explain Quran, do it according to a methodology; even a flimsier one. You can’t refute them by giving judgements like above. Try refuting their argument instead.

Both Ghamdi and Modudi were students of Ahsan Eslahi sahab.
Mawdudi was one year older than Islahi and both were peers in Jamaat Islami. They never had a student teacher relationship. Ghamidi studied from both of them though very briefly from Mawdudi.

Modudi wrote several blasphemous things in his books.
Like?

but do inject his thoughts in Islamic teachings by saying “Hamary Mutabiq ye youn hay”[according to me,it’s like that] which is very harmful thing.
So its harmful if one keeps an option open that his view might be wrong. Should I tell you the instances when likes of Malik, Shafii and Abu Hanifa do the same.

Ghamdi also raise point over the authenticy of celebrities like Ayesha[RA] and Omar[RA] over hadiths.
Care to expound?

ghamdi is a right hand of jewish thinking. Will ghamdi is more intelligent than our ulema e karam? He is refusing also the Quranic verse about ababeel which is above mention He is refusing that ababeel didnt throw stone on abrahas elephant he was quraishies who throw stones nauzobillah

Yes he is far, far more intelligent that “your” ulema e karam…Sorry for the tone but if you act like a child then you will be responded like a child too. I mean where do you get off by saying he is “right hand of jewish thinking”? So by not agreeing to ababeels, he becomes the right hand of Jews? I respectfully beg to think before you make jest of yourself.

Thanks for the balanced approach on argument. I agree that we should stay focused on the argument rather than emotion. You seemed to be oriented towards those who don’t read the scholars, so perhaps what I’ll say won’t apply here, but I would like to add this perspective. That is, I prefer to read both the critics and also the scholars. It may be that the critics catch points that I might miss or not think about, and it’s also true that the critics may misread or distort the scholars they criticize. The combination of reading critics and scholars can counter both of these problems and lead to a better understanding of the issues.

This smells like Fazlur Rahman redux. For Pakistan’s sake, I hope the mullahs don’t succeed in running him out of town, too.

To Adnan:

The typical emotional arguments and conspiratorial insinuations.

Of course he has opinions. All scholars do, and most share them quite freely. It is impossible not to have opinions and I for one would not want scholars to refrain from sharing theirs. Ghamdi at least respects his readers enough to be open about that.

Perhaps this “cabal” prefers to reflect before jumping to unwarranted conclusions.

And so what if he has “issues” with the miraculous interpretation of this story? The Shahadah makes no mention of slavish literalism at all time, nor does it bar us from exploring scientific explanations for phenomena that we do not understand. The Prophet’s (pbuh) greatest miracle–the Holy Quran–was, from a strictly naturalistic perspective, totally explainable, but that didn’t make it any less miraculous.

I don’t have a problem with miracles per se, but I think they rarely are of the sort that defy all scientific explanation. And I don’t believe we are expected to see them at every turn. The Quran tells us is it a guidance for “those reflect”, not those who robotically take everything literally!

Having said that I admit there are cases that are difficult to explain without recourse to miracles.

But there is nothing impious about considering alternative explanations (scientific, mystical, poetic) that allow us to understand a challenging ayat in a way that does not require us to ignore the laws of the universe that Allah (sbt) Himself invokes as evidence of His power in the Quran.

I was watching a documentary on the History Channel the other day about the story of Musa (AS). The researchers argued that the parting of the Red Sea could be “naturally” explained based on geological evidence of an underwater earthquake that caused a tsunami which would’ve suddenly and temporarily drained certain parts of the Red Sea. So, the “scientific” explanation in this case would be that at a time that Moses was being chased by the Pharoah’s army a cataclysm that had never been seen there before happened on cue for the Israelites and then reversed itself in time to kill their pursuers. Is that not a miracle?!?

I get so tired of this shallow, “I’m more superstitious than thou” posturing.

there can be more methodologies,say more than three..school of thoughts came into existence according to the need of time and civilization and some time term “balance” is relative too
In these times of amalgamation and stereotype interpretation..And in the era of textual de-construction,one must be careful and sharp while visiting the text ..You must go through the work done on Maqasid e shariat (if u r serious)
try to read ibn e aashoor,tah jabir alwani,nejatullah siddiqi,tariq ramdan,al khamleeshi,allal al fasi ..that wil give u a new horizon
take care
wassalam

Its not about who refute to whom- My response was all for sake of learning. I hope none of you has some emotional relation with ghamdi :-)

I actually missed your link and just found out via my site stats+ i am at office so wouldn’t be able to answer all of your qustions. You said:

So its harmful if one keeps an option open that his view might be wrong. Should I tell you the instances when likes of Malik, Shafii and Abu Hanifa do the same.

It’s harmful to challenge the authority of companions. Ghamdi several times expressed his doubts and didnt consider hadiths naratted by Ayesha[RA] and Omar[RA]. Several times he expressed it on local channels. None of mentioned imam made any such attempts in their life.

Differentiating and drawing parallels between Fazlur Rahman and Ghamidi would be a good exercise. A sizeable difference would be that Rahman did not even started working towards a Contemporary Islamic methodology, except his unique approach towards Quran; Ghamidi, on the other hand is moving fast towards a coherent methodology. If he is lucky enough to find good students, we might see a Contemporary School in 50 years of time.

Adnan, I agree with you that its not a matter of arguing for the sake of it and learning has no end. I have as much emotional attachment with Ghamidi as any other contemporary scholar, may it be Tariq Jameel, Taqi Usmani or Khalid Aboul Fadl.

There is no need to bother yourself brother. You may or may not answer my questions.

It’s harmful to challenge the authority of companions. Ghamdi several times expressed his doubts and didnt consider hadiths naratted by Ayesha[RA] and Omar[RA]. Several times he expressed it on local channels. None of mentioned imam made any such attempts in their life.

I reiterate that I am not defending Ghamidi’s POVs here. I just wish you to understand that statements like above are problematic and I’ll try to show the ambiguities therein, insha’Allah.

Expressing doubt on authenticity of some hadith cannot be equated with challenging or negating the authority of Companions, as you seem to contend. Muhadithin have always done it in the past. In addition to that, Jurists employ hadith differently in their respective juridical frameworks. As you might know, Malik does not derive similarly from Hadith as Shafii does for example. Abu Hanifa give more authority to a Companion’s athar and a practice or saying related from him than hadith with single chains of authority. Ahmed Bin Hanbal takes a weak hadith over Qiyaas. Ibn Taymiah, Ibn Hazm and other jurist have different methods. However your statement seems to insinuate as if there exists a single unanimous never-argued-about methodology in history which Ghamidi has some how negated. Read Shafii’s Kitab al-Umm, see how he attacks Maliki jurists who give more status to Madinite practice than hadith of Prophet or Companions. Trust me, it has always happened in the past.

I dont know exactly what you mean by ‘negating narrations from Ayesha and Umar’. I am not aware of any such opinion where he has specifically raised doubts on Ayesha and Umar.

Its important to understand that Hadith and Sunnah are not interchangeable terms in Ghamidi’s methodology. You can refer to his position in his books or site. There is always room to disagree with it but the understanding with clarity is the prerequiste for any such discussion. You can read my understanding in these two articles.

Reading more and more on the links you gave and other links I have found only one thought comes to mind:

The deeper I dive into the ocean of knowledge, I realize how much more I have to swim.

The above realization can be a beautiful thing so sometimes I feel that we should temper this drive to investigate and find the truth by the old acronym I learned a long time ago:
KISS: keep it simple stupid.

BTW, I should’ve noted that my comparison to Fazlur Rahman was purely political. I’m referring to the demonization and censorship evident in the attacks you uncovered in your searches.

Not that I think such a comparison would be unbecoming, though. Rahman was IMO a brilliant scholar who anticipated much of what leading scholars are debating today. Most importantly, having voices like his in the debate in Pakistan over the last 3 decades could’ve made a big difference and perhaps avoided this vicious circle that Pakistan finds itself in today.

Also, my post came off shriller than intended. My apologies if I offended Adnan or anybody else. I just find it frustrating when traditionalism is equated with accepting debatable interpretations without question.

You are right Svend. I understand that you had political concerns in your mind. Its too unfortunate that Pakistani traditionalist failed to comprehend Rahman’s project in its totality and took it to political arena.

Blame also goes to Pakistani dictators/politicians who tend to pick and choose from scholars. In fact Ghamidi first wrote against the so-called Hudood Ordinance in 80s during Zia’s regime. At that time his opinions were not in harmony with the ruling regime.

As far as Rahman is concerned, he was ahead of his times and IMHO, his primary project was more related to Islamization of Knowledge through educational reforms and revival of dialectics. In this regard, I tend to put him more in the ranks of Malik Bennabi and Muhammad Iqbal.

What you are calling for is exactly what I think is necessary for Islamic revival in the West and that is an intellectual investment in understanding the scholarly works available.

The problem that many face is language. Many neither read Arabic nor Urdu nor Turkish or any other “Islamic language” which hosts scholarly discourse.

Another problem we face is that people are not willing to pay for books they shy away if they have to invest 100 dollars for a book or its equivalent in Euros or British pounds in the English language.

Another problem we face is that what is in the market place is either very costly or it is written by orientalists. With that said there at minimum a slew of theses written by Muslims in English and a host of other works that are not given proper regard and in stead orientalist works are digested in their stead.

So a possible way out of this crisis is to register and track down what is available in English, is of high quality and is written by qualified persons of knowledge. Then we need to focus and understand the concepts and build study circles around these works without a biased commitement but rather with the intent of understanding.

The tilte of the entry is more of a sarcastic one-liner than something objective. I dont think for a minute that scholars can be judged as ‘true’ or ‘false’. I would go as far as saying that the whole idea of labeling scholars is absurd in itself as it commonly leads one to infer that a particular scholar’s intention can be right or wrong.

Yes, there are good and bad scholars. However, that too remains debatable and their works are enough to give degree to their wisdom and let experts judge the quality of their work. In my opinion, a valid criteria to judge a scholar is to see whether he is qualified enough to make the kind of assertions that he has.

Mr. Ghamidi, like Sir Syed, Farahi and Islahi before him, is far from being a scholar. Rather his Eman itself is doubtful, due to his rejection of beliefs proven by mass-transmitted narrations and concensus of the Ummah. Like like his disbelief in the decent of Esa `alayhi al Salam before the final hour.

ghamdi is not the real scholar because those who want to talk on islam must be aalim and studied in well known islamic jamia and futher course of fatawa become mufti and first of all ghamdi applied islam on his body too.

its truly disappoinitng to note that in this era of research , we are stuck with the traditionalist and rigid interpertaion of our great relogion.

i am not advocating for Ghamidi , but i truly beleive that each scholar has the right to present his view and it is the job of general public to scrutunize his thoughts on the basis of Quran and Sunnah.

but declaring a person’s emaan doubtfull is highly condemnable , may i dare to ask Mr. ahmed , by which device he measured the emaan of javed ahmed ghamidi, we should refrain from such harsh statements and focus ourselves on the his teachings only..

wether a person has a the right emaan or not, it is for the Allah to judge not we human beings.

Assalam-o-Alaikum brothers! I think John Esposito from George Town University wrote correct about Ghamidi in “Oxford dictionary of Islam” that he is frequently labeled a modernist for his insistence on the historical contextualization of Muhammad’s revelation in order to grasp its true moral import. And I think this emphasis on contextualization of Qur’anic verses is the main difference between Ghamidi and traditionalists. As in traditionalists, quite often hadith takes precedence over Qur’an. According to my reading of Ghamidi, if ahadith are read in light of the Qur’an, they can perfectly be explained provided they fulfill other criterias set by our classical Muhadithin.

This is the prime difference between Ghamidi and the orthodox ulemas,i think this should not be taken as a conspiracy against Islam , but should be viewed as a different opinion and we should respect that.
The difference of opinion should not be taken as the basis to brand a person muslim or kaafir

Sir,
No DOUBT THAT mR jAVED aHMED gHAMIDI IS A GREAT SCHOLAR BUT THERE SOME THING MORE WHICH NEEDS TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION.

Deen is not prastash. It is nizam e Zindagi. During Abbasis era deen was changed into madhab. GREAT ROLE IS PLAYED BY FALSE ahdidhs and tafaseers.
I thisk we need to investigate into this aspect of the tregedy and conspiracy against Islam.

At poresent we HAVE anothe great scholar who is very little known. He is Mr. Azizullah Bohio of Sindh Sagar Academy Nawab shah. Please also see his writings.

ITS SO SAD THAT IN THE NAME OF ISLAM OUR MULLAS ARE TRYING TO ARABNISING INSTEAD OF ISLAMISING THE WORLD.
THEY WANTUS(NON ARAB MUSLIMS) TO BELIEVE AND AND UNDERSTAND THE ISLAM THE WAY ARABS DO.I ASK EVERY ONE IN THIS DEBATE THAT IS IT IMPORTANT THAT WE SHOULD HAVE OUR NAMES LIKE ARABS,SHOULD WE DRESS THE WAY ARABS DO, SHOULD WE FORGET OUR CULTURE AND CIVILISATION,IS THAT SO THAT ARABS ARE THE BEST HUMAN BEING THAT EVERY ONE SHOULD FOLLOW THEM BLINDLY.
AND WHY GHAMIDI SHOULD NOT HAVE HIS OWN SCHOOL OF THOUGHT,YET MANY ARABS SCHOLARS HAVE REPRESENT THE ISLAM IN TOTALLY DIFERENT UNDERSTANDING YET NON ARAB MUSLIM HAD NO OBJECTIONS.
I FULLY SUPPORT GHAMIDI AND HIS RERESENTATION OF SIMPLE NON ARAB ISLAM.PLEASE LET ISLAM BE LIBRATED FROM ARAB CULTURE.ISLAM IS NOT THEIR PROPERTY.

Aslam-O-Alikum
I would be very brief,it’s not about that who’s wrong or who’s right.I wont take anybody’s side because i prefer that each individual should read quran first with translation plz!!! and try to understand it.and then ur secound preference should be hadiths….give urself time….and then see who is right and who is wrong..are the mula’s wrong or ghamdi is wrong or any other scholar..remeber they also studied islam by themselves b4 following any1 .first you should read the tarjuma of quran..my humble request.
ap sab apnah bohot ziada khayal rakkay.

and u must add that, independent inquiry needs command over language ..as Wittgenstein says LIMIT OF MY LANGUAGE IS THE LIMIT OF MY WORLD.. try to understand Quran in it’s language then your position will b muhkam

Assalamo Alaikum
I would like to imvite all of you to please visit following websites
being developed and maintained by a team of young professionals and
researchers.
1- http://www.hudoodordinance.com
2- http://www.searchhadith.com
I am sure you will find matterial that can clear u on several important issues
regarding Ghamidi and other munkireen e Hadith.
Regards
Dr.Faiyaz Alam, Karachi

Your point being? People like you are just a nuisance to others who actually want to learn something. Look around you, your thought and your actions have only gotten us shame and pain in this world. Open your eyes, nobody is saying to accept lies. But to label someone Munki e Hadees, even though he wholeheartedly conforms to Nabi PBUH’s views is utterly childish. Whats wrong if he asks to judge the hadees in light of Quran? Dont you think its the right approach?

It is disappointing to see yet another baseless allegation against a man who holds a different view on hadith.
I invite Dr.Fayiaz alam to visit http://www.ghamidi.org to see for himself ghamid’s view on hadith.
i am not advoacting for him ,but its only for putting the record straight.

Salam,
Does our Din Islam permits us to label a person as kafir or Munkar-e Hadith or measure his/her iman by our own standards? I have studied teachings of Mr. gamidi and found it methodical and logical. For argument sake if somebody after studying his point of view is not convinced, does it give a right to that person to label him as fitna or Munkar? We need to to be very careful about such statements as one day we all have to appear before Almigthy and if we are asked under which authority we labelled a true muslim as Munkar.. will we be able to reply? As per my information Mr. Ghamidi talks with lots of study behind him. He is man of examplory Charactor who practices every bit of Din in his personal life He is a man who has great vision. For example In 80’s I attended one of his lecture about future out come of Afghan war… the post war picture he presented highlighted his vision and his inellect. I remember many people criticized him for his point of view in those days as well.. all his predictions are realities of today.

i really appreciate your view.
the civilizational downfall is the result of corrupting idea-forces,spoiled knowledge culture and lack of pursuit of knowledge
And unfortunately Muslims are living in the age of that downfall,which taught us that logic and rational has no use(when it comes to Islam )and knowledge is the authority of mullaz the product of madarsa who lives in fools paradise..with no understanding of text and context

assalam alaikum
interesting point of view.
The problem with this methodology is that the primary tool for re-discovering “True Islam” (which is presumed by the Reformists to be lost) is “rationality” or rational analysis.

These 2 assumptions which underlie this particular Reformist methodology have inevitable consequences. If Mr. Ghamidi does
not deny all the supernatural/metaphysical element in our religion, his followers eventually will.

Besides, some components of “rational analysis” are the same over time, others will change with the times and the different intellectual milleu/training of the particular reformer.

Still, you are right in pointing out that after 1400 years of Islam, we are bound to have different views as top what it is, and the sincerity of people like Mr. Ghamidi should not be doubted tho’ we may disagree with his methodology & his conclusions.

I think we should have the courage to tolerate different views as long as they do not deviate from the fundamentals of Islam.
I wonder is this attitude was also adopted by our four imams, who differ so much with each other in the description of certain matters.
As far as my knowledge goes they held each other in high esteem and respect ,but at the same time prsented their own opinion .

This is the way we should be adopt too so that intolerance and violence may be shunned

What I know that Mr.Ghamidi is not getting any work these days that’s why he wrote the script of “Khuda K liye” or I think appeared in movie as well. In future we might see him painting poster of upcoming movies of shoaib since he issued fatwas that painting and music is haram and Prophet Muhammad(saw) was wrong. Bravo Ghamidi! you reminded me modudi and GHulam pervaiz!

These legislative laws in the Quran and the prophet’s Madina were considered progressive and modern in the 7th century which is why nobody, not even the pagans, objected to it. The pagans objected to theological and ritual issues and not the state legal system since it was appropriate to theirs and progressive according to their time period. Issues like the kind of food to eat and deity to worship were more problematic for the pagans than inheritance laws or penal codes applied by the 1st Muslim community in Madina.

The state legislations mentioned in the Quran are not religious but civil. They were to be applied to Muslims and non Muslims in Madina alike. The mission of the prophet was not to govern and rule but circumstances led him to that and God guided him to establish a civil society that will ensure stability and justice based on 7th century standard. There is no mention on the Quran of any legislation not relevant to the prophet’s Madina. If it was the intention of God to establish a state legal system along with religious legislation God would have certainly layed a framework that deals with legal issues outside the prophets’ Madina community’s legislative needs. Issues that were not relevant to that Madina community but were needed by later generations of Muslims. But He did not since it was not the mission of the Quran to do so. The job of the prophet as the Quran says is to convey the religious message. However circumstances led to the prophet establishing a community and this led to God guiding His prophet towards establishing a legal state structure as part of His guidance and support for His prophet.

Which is why we see there are gender differences in the state legislations in the Quran but no such differences in the religious legislations. Men and women fast, pray, perform haj, observe the halals and harams, zakat , die and resurrect and get judged exactly the same way as men.

All the functions of the religious legislation relies on constants such as the movements of the sun, movements of the moon, usage of water and direction of Qibla. These are constants and not changing. They remain the same whether in its shape, direction or time. It is apllicable and accesible to everyone, whether rich or poor, male or female or ignorant or intelligent. The theological issues are also constant and beyond change. Humans do not control angels or past prophets or the ressurection from death or heaven or hell. These are constant theological realities beyond the scope of human evolution and progress and are attained by faith and faith alone.

However the state legislation in the Quran does seperate in some situations between gender and also between slaves and free men as this was the social and political milieu of the 7th century. Just as many modern state frameworks today seperates between citizens and non citizens, or between various professions or even legal statuses. God however does not discriminate between a man and woman, between a slave and a free man or between the various legal status of individuals when it comes to religious legislations as God is not a socially and culturally evolving entity as humans are. It was God’s wisdom to establish a community with the legal and political norms of their time or else it would not have been seen by its intended targets as fair, just or even applicable and would not have achieved a stability enabling the madina community to spread the Quran and the religious legislations needed by future Muslim adherents. It was a legislative framework appropriate to the tribal communities that existed in 7th century Arabia.

We must seperate between religious and state legislations in the Quran and also identify what are the situations that was relevant to the 7th century Madina community and what are the issues relevant to us today. The concept of Muslim orthodoxy that emerged more than a century and a half after the prophet during the Abbasid era by the hands of Imam Al Shafi and company failed to do so. It simply relied on mimicking the practice of the 1st Muslim community in everything from religious functions and rituals to a legal and political code that became according to this orthodoxy also the last and only community. Thus depriving Muslim communities down the ages of any progress. A religious tradition and orthodoxy that succeded in theory but remained just that, a theory. Never able to be fully implemented in practice but always successful in depriving alternatives. It failed to appreciate the historicity of the 1st Muslim community and relied on the convenience of mimicking. It left the Muslim masses in the peculiar situation of irrelevancy and contradiction in the modern era. A contradiction between theory and practice.

Adnan, you have done the same thing which this blog entry started with. You heard something about Islahi and decided that ‘his mind was unable to accept’ over ‘Allah’s kun’. I urge you, and anyone who feels the same, to just read Islahi’s momentous work on Quran: Taddabur-i-Quran. You will hardly find anyone more sincere than him to the word of God, and His religion.

The reason he has given a different understanding is because the history of the Arabs, and Arabic language point to that meaning. The problem that happens today is that people hear an opinion, they create it as a belief, and eventually, when they hear a new interpretation, they decide that the person who brought that new interpretation is a ‘deviant’. That is the criteria we judge people with.

The opinion that is rampant amongst us is based on a narration in a history book. Islahi corroborated it against evidence in other historical books as well as the grammar (which any student of Arabic can appreciate) and came up with that translation.

As for God’s ‘kun’, Islahi has upheld the splitting of river and drowning of Pharoah’s forces, he has upheld ‘rizq’ found near Mary, he has upheld all the divine tribulations falling on the nations, and not only that, he has given an interpretation of God’s law of annhilating nations that no scholar before him (except Farahi) has given – in other words, he has counted miracles of God in a way that no one did before.

Unfortunatley, people are not going to read his works. They will listen to what others have to say, and then they will pass it along, even though Quran says:

“O ye who believe! If a wicked person comes to you with any news, ascertain the truth, lest ye harm people unwittingly, and afterwards become full of repentance for what ye have done.” (Quran 49:6)

I urge everyone who wants to form an opinion on Islahi to just read his commentary on Quran and then make a judgment instead of believing hearsay and getting lost in propaganda.

I am not here to support someone specifically, but I feel sorry for the people who are habitual to follow things blindly, Who do not read Quran with translation and do not strive to understand the basic principles of Islam, Who use Quran for any purpose other than getting on to the right path, who do not understand why this world was created, why the quran was revealed, what is deen, what is sunnah and what is not, how should a hadith be taken, why prophets were sent, and what Allah wants from us, who never tried to go through seerat-ul-nabi once in their life but spend their whole night in naat-khuwanis, who have created their own gods in form of mullahs who are authorized to make something haram and halal while Allah is the only authority.

I will suggest Adnan Siddiqui to open his mind to accept concepts other than his. This is good to have such belief that what you know is right but it is better to have some room for correction. Huzoor himself once challenged kuffar to bring something better than Quran so he will accept it than why we have got stuck on what our Mullahs has taught us?

We will have to understand that nothing in this universe works against law defined by Allah. We will have to understand what actually a DEEN is, what principle does it follow? We will have to understand that Hazrat Mohammad P.B.U.H interacted with thousands of people in different situations and answered them according to their situation, the circumstances and the era. We will have to understand that something that comes in the boundary of Deen and has been performed by Hazrat Mohammad P.B.U.H is called “sunnah” and if Hazrat Mohammad P.B.U.H liked or disliked something personally then it could be something different but we love Hazrat Mohammad P.B.U.H and we try to do same as Huzoor did.

If you understand the above mentioned set of principles and then you go through a “Riwayat” then you will have an idea yourself that it has mistakes or not.

About Mr. Ghamidi, I think that he is a sensible Islamic scholar and knows the real meaning of Islam. He does not hide reality from his listeners. He does not feel himself appropriate to formulate something haram or halal. The most important thing, he does not belong to any Firqah. He does not close the doors of research on Islam for their listeners. He says that if something has been granted by Allah to humanity then this is the responsibility of people to make the right use of it. This is us who produce wine from the grapes.

He does not belief in riwayaats. He measures everything on the basis of principles defined in Quran. The same was said by Allama Iqbal:

Yeh Ummat Riwaayaat Mein Khogayi
Haqeeqat Kharafaat mein Khogayi.

I think that Allama Iqbal has got the same vision of Islam too. And if he would be with us today then people would have given fatwas against him too.

“I prefer Mr. Ghamidi but I still have some room that there could be some mistakes in his opinions too and will disagree him if someone else will give me a better answer of the same question according to the Islamic Principles and Law.”

Mr. Ghamidi has different concepts than Maulana Maudoodi but still I can surely say that Maulana Maudoodi can not write blasphemous things in his tafseer.

I have heard many scholars including barelvis and deobandis but I always got a better answer from Mr. Ghamidi. And this is just a rumor that Mr. Ghamidi wrote the script of film “khuda ke liye”, he did not. I think Shoaib Mansoor does not need anyone to write a script for his film. I have gone through all messages and I feel that few people have hate for Mr. Ghamidi because Mr. Ghamidi thinks differently than their Mullahs, And I will recall all those respectable participants that when Hazrat Mohammad P.B.U.H tried to correct Kuffars, they refused to accept a CHANGE because the Islamic principles were against their concepts. And their concepts have been ruined in the same way as ours. It is also possible that all religions exist today in this world are the ruined form of Islam.

Go back to your primary source that is “Quran” and do not follow anyone blindly. Please read the following verses from Quran Chapter 2 “Surah al-Baqarah”.

“Their similitude is that of a man who kindled a fire; when it lighted all around him, Allah took away their light and left them in utter darkness. So they could not see. Deaf, dumb, and blind, they will not return (to the path). Or (another similitude) is that of a rain-laden cloud from the sky: in it are zones of darkness, and thunder and lightning: they press their fingers in their ears to keep out the stunning thunderclap, the while they are in terror of death. But Allah is ever round the rejecters of Faith! The lightning all but snatches away their sight; every time the light (helps) them, they walk therein, and when the darkness grows on them, they stand still. And if Allah willed, He could take away their faculty of hearing and seeing; for Allah hath power over all things.”

Yes I fully agree with imran ,one should not judge things on fragile sources. We should have concrete support to brand any thing halal or haram ,further more we should have the audacity to accept different opinion ,it is not necessary that every new concept or interpertation is wrong

With reference to my post on 7th September 2007, I want to add few things more.

Mr. Javed Ahmed Ghamidi and Khalid Zaheer are the only scholars from Pakistan who have slapped Ali Sina’s face. Ali Sina is an ex-Muslim (murtid) running an organization named Faith Freedom and the main objective of this organization is to publish disgusting material against Islam. You can search Google and you will find that why and how Ali Sina is spending so much money and time for this purpose. Has Ali Sina lost his senses or someone else is supporting him to run this organization?

I have read the complete conversation between Ali Sina and Mr. Khalid Zaheer (on behalf of Javed Ahmed Ghamidi) and I found Ali Sina simply illogical and rigid.

Mr. Javed Ahmed Ghamidi and Mr. Khalid Zaheer being Islamic Scholars have shown their courage and love with Islam. They have debated Ali Sina for a long time but then stopped because Ali Sina is not running the organization to accept their views, of course.

A true scholar believes in his knowledge and accepts the challenges and considers his responsibility to expose the truth.

Salam to All.
We must spent some time during our day to understand Quran, not just reading the translation but also to understand the Ayat we are reciting. If we just spent atleast 15 minutes daily to read and understand the book of God, I think by the end of year we will know a lot about Qur’an, and should continue to do so for the rest of our life.
About Mr. Ghamidi, I think he is doing a lot of positive research, no one has any right to give fatwa of kufr against anyone unless he is proved to do shirk.

Salam to All.
Every muslim should read and understand Qur’an. when we read translation, we should try to understand it also, go slow, think why Allah said that. If we spend atleast 15 minutes a day, in understanding Qur’an, we will know a lot.

About Mr. Ghamidi, I think he is doing a lot of positive research, may Allah give his reward. We do not have any right to give fatwa against any one unless he is doing clear shirk.

if u thnk dat its tru dat u show in the flm so remambr 1 thng dat u r wrong as showed abt moulvi and u r not a muslim v r true 2 say dat u r khatmal my name is also maryam and i m totly difrnt 2 dat maryam ho is in film just getting shy and when u got shy so die geo is nothing except a destrucion of pak generation

Dear SIR ghamdi Sahib id doing a great service to Islam. Indeed he is a great scolar.

Whole Muslim world is under repression and tremendous pressure of Mullaiyat which is following a fabricated and false (TEHREEF SHUDAH) Islam. In such a situation it is a brave effort by Javed Ahmed Ghamdi to explain din as given by allah.

But Mr. Ghamdi is still presenting certain things as in line with our traditional Mullah. Specially he is unable to get out of concept of Prastash. Deen is Nizam e Zindigi and not poja paat.

I would like to request Mr. Ghamdi to please consider works of Sir Seyd Ahmed Khan, Allama Iqbal, Maulana Aslam Jeerajpuri,Allama Mashraqi And great scollar Mr. Ghulam Ahmed Parvez.
Also we have living scholars like Dr. Shabbir Ahmed and Mr. Azizullah Bohio.

I would like to request Mr. Ghamdi to please cosider works of these writers with an open mind and benefit from them.

I hope that this message reaches Mr. Ghamdi.

Just for example I wish to present you difference between Madhab and DEEN which I got from a web site.A comparative study of religion and Deen, should help us understand the vital and fundamental characteristics of each and the differences between the two:
Religion Deen
Religion is merely some sort of subjective experience and is concerned only with the so-called private relationship between God and man.
Deen is an objective reality and a system of collective life.
Every follower of a Religion is satisfied that he has established a communion with the Almighty, and the objective of each individual is his own salvation.
The aim of Deen on the other hand is the welfare and progress of all mankind, and the character and constitution of a society indicates whether or not it is founded upon the Divine Law.
Religion does not afford us any objective. criterion by which we could determine whether or not our actions are producing the desired results.
In a social order governed by Deen, the development of a collective and harmonious life correctly indicates whether or not the people are pursuing the right course.
Religion is hostile to scientific investigation and is an adversary of reason, so that it could flourish unhampered with the aid of a blind faith.
Deen helps in the development of human reason and knowledge, allows full freedom to accept or reject on the basis of reason and arguments, and encourages investigation and discovery of all the natural phenomena to illumine the path of human life and its advancement in the light of the Permanent Values.
Religion follows the susceptibilities and prejudices of men and pampers them.
Deen seeks to lead men to a path of life that is in harmony with the realities of life.
In every age, therefore, Religion sets up new idols and mumbo-jumbos in order to keep the people’s attention away from the real problems of life.
But Deen is rational and radical: it breaks all idols, old and new, and is never variable in its principles.
Religion induces a perpetual sense of fear in the minds of men and seeks to frighten them into conformity; While Deen treats fear as a form of polytheism and seeks to make men courageous, daring and self-reliant.
Religion prompts men to bow before every seat of authority and prestige, religious as well as temporal.
Deen encourages man to walk about with his head erect, and attain self-confidence.
Religion induces man to flee from struggle of life.
But Deen calls upon him to face the realities of life squarely, whatever the hazards.
Religion treats the world of matter with contempt and calls upon man to renounce it. It promises paradise only in the Hereafter as a reward for the renunciation of the material world.
Deen, on the other hand, enjoins the conquest of matter and leads man to immeasurable heights of attainment. It exhorts him to seek well-being and happiness in this world as well as felicity in the life Hereafter.
Religion encourages belief in fatalism, and this tends to dissuade man from active life and self-development.
Deen gives man power to challenge fate, and provides energy for a life of activity and self-development.
Religion seeks to comfort the weak, the helpless and the oppressed with the belief that the affairs of this world are governed by the Will of God and that its acceptance and resignation helps to endear them to God. This sort of teaching naturally tends to morbidity, and emboldens their religious leaders who profess to interpret the Will of God, so that they indulge in their misdeeds with perfect impunity and persuade the adherents to a complete and quiet submission.
Deen, on the other hand, raises the banner of revolt against all forms of tyranny and exploitation. It calls upon the weak and the oppressed to follow the Divine Laws and thereby seek to establish a social order in which all tyrants and oppressors will be forced to accept the dictates of right and justice. In this social order, there is no place for dictators, capitalists or priests. They are all enemies of Deen.
Religion enjoins religious meditation in the name of worship and thus induces self-deception.
Deen exhorts men to assert themselves and struggle perpetually for the establishment of the Divine Social Order, and its betterment when attained. Worship in din really means obedience to the Laws of God.
Religion frowns and sneers at all things of art and beauty.
Deen defies those who forbid the enjoyment of the good and beautiful things of life which God has created for the enjoyment of man.
Religion denounces everything new and declares all innovation as sin.
Deen holds that the needs and demands of human life keep changing with the change in the conditions of life; change and innovation are, therefore, demanded by life itself. Only the Divine Laws are immutable.
________________________________________
It should now be easy for us to see the fundamental difference between Deen and Religion. Islam means saying “Yes” to life; while the response of religion is “No”!
unquote.

Adnan Siddiqi are you serious? You and the other Siddiqi seem to have a personal grudge vs Ghamidi and it shows. Whatever enables you to qualify someone as a scholar or not? I can assure you Ghamidi is a far greater scholar than you. Moreover, if you don’t know what you are talking about, its better to keep your mouth shut. Let us address some of your ridiculous remarks:

>>t’s harmful to challenge the authority of companions. Ghamdi several times expressed his doubts and didnt consider hadiths naratted by Ayesha[RA] and Omar[RA]. Several times he expressed it on local channels. None of mentioned imam made any such attempts in their life.

Rest of answerrs will be given later Inshallah.<>What I know that Mr.Ghamidi is not getting any work these days that’s why he wrote the script of “Khuda K liye” or I think appeared in movie as well. In future we might see him painting poster of upcoming movies of shoaib since he issued fatwas that painting and music is haram and Prophet Muhammad(saw) was wrong. Bravo Ghamidi! you reminded me modudi and GHulam pervaiz!<<

This shows your immaturity and shows you are in fact the one with a personal vendetta vs Ghamidi. Not only did he not write the script or appear in the movie, his ideas were merely what had motivated Shoaib to go ahead with the movie in the first place. Get your facts right. Your ignorance does not help your cause and wins you no votes. Ghamidi is a solid scholar and InshaAllah will grow in reputation and stature in the years to come. He has already accomplished great work in the field and its only a matter of time before his works are translated into other languages. He is destined for acclaim and greatness whether you like it or not.

Still can’t stop laughing at your backwardness in relation to Omar and Ayeshas Hadiths being questioned.

Adnan Siddiqi are you serious? You and the other Siddiqi seem to have a personal grudge vs Ghamidi and it shows. Whatever enables you to qualify someone as a scholar or not? I can assure you Ghamidi is a far greater scholar than you. Moreover, if you don’t know what you are talking about, its better to keep your mouth shut. Let us address some of your ridiculous remarks:

>>t’s harmful to challenge the authority of companions. Ghamdi several times expressed his doubts and didnt consider hadiths naratted by Ayesha[RA] and Omar[RA]. Several times he expressed it on local channels. None of mentioned imam made any such attempts in their life.Rest of answerrs will be given later Inshallah.<<

What world are you living in? Clearly you are unaware of the Tradition-Critical approach that has been employed for over half a century in the west. Goldzhiers legendary work on the authenticity of Hadith has shown how even Sahih hadith are not entirely reliable. So it doesn’t matter if the narrators are Ayesha or Omar or whoever. The fact is, Hadith weren’t compiled for over a century after the Prophet pbuh’s death. Get over your idealistic views and enter the real world. For more information, refer to Fred Donner’s work on approaches to early islamic history. It wouldn’t hurt if you were exposed to the Skeptical approach used by Patricia Crone. You seem to be entirely ignorant of developments in Islamic research and are still living in your idealistic cocoon. Come out of it and embrace the reality. Rubins work on the origins of islam that he constructs entirely through traditions taken from the Works of Tibari and other acclaimed authors, will open your eyes to the contradictions and bias that is loaded within Hadith (no matter who the narrator may be).

also, stop being ignorant. The prophet pbuh himself was welcomed to Medina with song and music. Where are you getting your info from? My prophet was not a hypocrite and would never have allowed such things to go in were they ‘haram’. It is so easy for you guys to call everything haram. Seriously need a life.

Painting never was, and never will be haram. It is the contents that you paint that you need to be careful with. So long as you don’t depict anything lewd, it is ok. Same for music. You guys seriously need to be shipped off to Afghanistan, or perhaps Guantanamo is more to your liking!

Just a situation I want to put infront of you and ask you to give me a logical and practical solution.

Suppose you are a person with intellect and knowledge ( and Muslim), and you are in sub-continent where people are converting to Islam from Hinduism and other religion where worshipping statue and holy pictures in a norm. since a normal person with no detail insight into the teachings of Islam, can clearly get misguided and get into the same concept of putting pictures/statues in their homes and accidently or unintentionally start doing the same worship practice as in days of hinduism. I ask you if you were a Muslim scholar in this situation how would you tackle it, keeping in mind not everyone is englightened and intelligence as you are.

Mr Nazir,
Instead of focusing on the differences between religion and Deen.. which is a moot exercise in itself as almost all scholars recognize that Islam is not merely a religion, it is a civilization. I would suggest you focus on Islam and what it has to say.
You seem more intent on following your own impression of Islam, terming it nizam e zindagi. My dear friend, nizam e zindagi includes pooja paat. It stems from the reason of our existence, something we question and which leads us to believe in Islam in the first place.
If you take the pooja out of Islam or for that matter any religion/way of life.. it remains Islam no more. You take the soul of Islam out of its body, and it refuses to remain…

assalam-u-alaikum all
i read this article and i found it quite right, true, and useful. the explanation regarding allama javed ahmad ghamidi was absolutely right. i happen to have read so many books and watched so many tv programs of him. he has very great and deep basis and arguements behind his thoughts and opinions. he doesnt say anything without giving proper logic and arguements from quran, sunnah and islamic philosophy.

apart from allama javed ahmad ghamidi, i have also read so many books of and on allama iqbal, syed maududi, imam islahi and the imam-ul-mufassireen hameed-ud-din farahi. they were all really great people.

this is also right that me must not make our opinion from reading just websites on internet. they dont give us the slightest clue of the truth behind the legacy of these greatest scholars of their times.

may allah help ghamidi in portraying true picture of quran, sunnah and islamic philosophy.

AOA, i have seen here many good and critical arguments and also some baseless comments..i wud like to say only one thing and that is,these scholars are here to give us the interpretations of Quran and sunnat and its upto us now whom we want to follow! but first we shud also know abt the basics of these teachings so we can also decide whom we shud follow….the thing happening with muslim world is,we are following our scholars blindly and dont know much abt these teachings and if we ask our scholars abt these teachings,they are often unable to give us the reasonable logic, except to say its the order of Allah and Rasool SAW.but its not the right way to follow islam and also we are not answerable for the deed of our scholars and all others,so we shud not get emotional while discussing our holy scholars,we are only answerable for our own deeds.

Salaam,
read with interest your discussions on Javed Ghamdi. I had heard about him from friends that he is an “islamic scholar” who gives lectures on TV, and they invited me to a lecture. When I went there I saw a lot of literature offered at the entrance, all of it was so full of “khuda”,
and same was the content of his talk, and also of his colleagues. When questioned on the permissibility of using “khuda” for our Rab, he said he will answer on the third/last day of the prog, which he did not.
The man does not know/understand/value/remember/ the kalima tayyab. Therefore he will never gain addmissison to a muslim school, forget about learning and teaching.
Someone above said rightly : “keep it simple stupid”, that is right, because the christians say : “the devil is in the detail”.
With best wishes and Salaam, Najam

As reminder : La ilaha illa-ALLAH.
1st. Wahi/command : Iqra, b’ismi Rabbi’ka.
1st. Ayah in Kitab: B’ismi-ALLAH, ar’Rahmaan, ar’Raheem.
Allah’s Kalima does not change.
Question in Quran: “Who is more zalim-(unjust) than one who fabricates falsehood about Allah”. Therefore no “god” or “khuda” for Muslims.
This note is only for Muslims, others might take offence, but we cannot
force others to accept. Emaan is only with permission of our Khaliq- (i.e.Creator) who is our Rab, read ayahs 10:100, 7:180, 73:8, 7:71.
Salaam, Najam

1. Have you ever tried to understand Islam yourself?
2. Have you ever tried to understand Quran without wearing glasses of a particular sect?
3. Have you ever tried to know the facts behind the beliefs injected in your brain by your parents and your ulemas?
4. Have you ever tried to come out of your cave and to think out-of-the-box?
5. Have you ever tried to know whether the practices you follow on the name of Islam are really those that were prescribed by Mohammad P.B.U.H and followed by people 1400 years ago?
6. Have you ever tried to know that Islam is as it was revealed or has been changed by your ulemas and mufassirs?
7. Have you ever tried to learn arabic and to study different scholars on a same topic without any bias?
8. Have you ever tried to know whether the translation of Quran you read is the exact translation or is the resulting idea of translator?
9. Have you ever tried to know who is a true muslim?

if you haven’t tried any of the above then Who allowed you to discuss this topic here? What do YOU know about Islam? Which knowledge you use to decide whether a scholar is true or not? Why don’t you break the idols that are in your mind since ages? Why do you discuss personalities when it comes to Islam? Why don’t you discuss Islam? Why do you discuss traffic constable? Why don’t you discuss traffic rules and road-sense? Remember one thing, when you endorse a personality instead of Quran, you bow a seed of a sect. ISLAM DOES NOT SURVIVE BETWEEN SECTS. I wish I could make you understand and you could allow me to. Please understand otherwise “Tumhari daastan tak bhi na hogi daastanon mein”.

Allama Mashriqi was one of the greatest scholars that emerged from Indian sub-continent. Living scholars must look into his works such as Tazkirah. Mashriqi works also needs to be translated in English and other international languages.
Here is a link to Tazkirah:

Allama Mashriqi was one of the greatest scholars that emerged from the Indian sub-continent. Living scholars must look into his works such as “Tazkirah”. Mashriqi’s works also need to be translated in English and other international languages.
Here is a link to Tazkirah:

the discussion is again turning to a personal conflict.its the worst attitude of our umma,that we start to personalise the matters and this leads us to Division/Firqa Bandi.i also think that the points from imran are very well valid.we are avoiding to do such efforts in order to save us time for our other “important activities” and leave these things for our “holy scholars” and dont even think what they are telling us in the name of Islam and we are just practicing without knowing the principles of Islam and the real teachings of Islam. for those who are interested to know abt the true quranic definition of “Scholar” have a look in this website,after reading this, analyse our present scholars in term of this quranic definition of Scholars.http://www.toluislam.com/index.pl/pam?wid=152&func=viewSubmission&sid=985

I have also researched a lot on all of the things, which all of you over here have discussed, different controversial and puzzling topics, to which we don’t find instant answers and solutions to. I have also researched on a lot of local theologists, but I think the best one is Dr. Tahir-ul-Qadri, and his credibility is due to the fact that he has been lecturing Military Officers in the staff colleges, and mainly because he has a proper educational background, on what he is talking about! Ghamdi, shamdis are dramas, I don’t know, I am not impressed. Dr. Tahir-ul-Qadri is an authentic scholar, a phD, and he is not a maulvi, he is quite modern. Other great people were Dr. Ghulam Murtaza Shaheed and Dr. Israr, and also great research done by Dr. Shahid Masood of ARY, hat’s off to him, great job. I suggest all of you to read Dr. Muhammad Iqbal’s Reconstruction of Religious thought in Islam.

I consider religion a personal thing, and whatever I have said is for me and the research I have done is for me, everybody has a right to do his/her own research, and have his/her own opinions. We should not try to enforce our ideas on others. Discussion is good! But not for winning or loosing!

Dear afn,
I just said that it was one of the points, not the only criteria, rather not a criteria, just an observation. Dr. Tahir-ul-Qadri’s knowledge about Hadith and the authentic references he gives during his lectures, also his academic qualification is the basis. His approach is not only religious knowledge but also philosophical and theological. You didn’t read the whole thing.

Dear friends,
I have listened to Ghamdi, and observed that he has knowledge, and is a kind of an expert and can be called a scholar, to some extent. But if what some of our chat room friends have mentioned above about him is true and he really said those statements, then I have a lot of doubts about him and in that case he is not a scholar at all. Also I would listen to his lectures, but would never consult his lectures as reference. Because I am not convinced to that level. To me he is somebody new in the picture and controversial. But if he is a student of Maududi, then he should be somewhat in his senses, because Maududi was a scholar and quite a learned man. Otherwise, Ghamdi as a person seems to be a good man and a soft and humble natured man. His approach is not aggressive.

We should refrain ourselves and instruct others to refrain from the writings, speeches and programs of Javed Ahmed Ghamdi who is the head of Al Mawrid Institute Lahore, Renaissance, Understanding Islam, Islamic Issues ets.

The gentleman and his affiliates are deviants to the extreme of rejecting the Nasoos of the Quran let alone the Hadith.

He rejects

1. Any form of Had (Prescribed Punishment),
2. Hadith to be direct
3. Nazool Eesa Alahi Salam and his Life (like Qadiyanis)
4. Had for an Apostate (Murtad)
5. Claims the 7 recitations of quran to be wrong (he is a close ally and aide of Daniel Pipes and Robert Spencer)
6. Music and Dancing of all sorts is permissible
7. Jihad against oppression is the only jihad allowed
8. The Shahadat of a man and woman are equal
9. There is no concept of Purdah (Hijab / Veil) in Islam,

Apart from this he is flying high these days by coming on TV brought by GEO Television. Mr. Ghamidi has special interest in Asma Jahangir and Qadinyanis much of whose ideology is reflected in his articles.

One of his student Khalid Zaheer is Munkareen Hadith Like Islahi, Farahi, Ghulam Ahmed Pervez, Allama Mashriqui. Khalid Zaheer is a professor at LUMS, Lahore (one can expect him to be in places like this). the following link gives some overview of Khalid Zaheer’s thoughts

Ghamidi’s books are Bayan, Mizan and Burhan, the last one being a mockery of Islam, Prophets, Companions, Imams, Muhaditheen and Mufasereens. They are seldomly available in Pakistan but are available at Danish Sara which are regional centers for Ghamidi’s Operations.

The aim of this posting is to request all members not to fall into the traps of Ghamidi. At present he is being fully supported by the Qadiyani Lobby against the Hudood Ordinance. The next target given to GEO and Ghamidi is surely to fight against the 295-C Blasphemy Law, to accomodate Qadiyanis.

————–

Ghamdi does not claim to refute the status of Hadith directly yet he takes it a stage further ahead and categorizes hadith as something from which Ahkaam (Rulings) cannot be drawn and only Quran is the orignal source. He goest on to say that some Ahadith have been misinterpreted by ALL (yes ALL) the Imams, Mufasirs, Muhaditheen, Fuqah, Ulemas etc. To quote an example is his refutation of the Hadith that says (it is a Mafhoom) Whosoever Changes His Faith, Kill Him.

According to Ghamidi the ruling on Qital (Killing a Person) when he becomes a Murtad (Apostate) doesnot apply to present times. It was restricted to the time of Holy Prophet Salal Lahu Aalahi Wassalam and after that it had become Mauqoof. (Burhan, by Ghamidi). Ghamidi says that this Hadith has been misinterpreted by all the Ulemas for 1200 years wherein the meaining of Umoom (Generality) has been taken at large. Therefore he concludes that a person cannot be executed if he decides to change his religion from Islam because there is no evidence of it in Quran and Sunnah.

Ghamidi and his disciples also use the word Quran and Sunnah and separate Hadith from Sunnah.

He calls them the Shabistan Shibli of Knowledge and hails them as the reformists of this time. He has castigated Maulana Rashid Ahmed Gangohi (RA), Qasim Nanatwi (RA), Shaykh ul Hind, Syed Hussain Ahmed Madani, Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi, Allama Shabbir Ahmed Uthmani and calls them Bigots. According to Ghamidi this group of people (Deobandis) are like an old building with rotten foundations that will become empty by itself through passage of time.

Ghamadi enjoys special company with Robert Spencer and Danielt Pipes. What is interesting is that Ghamdi and his associates particularly Moiz Amjad have tried to defend Islam against the criticism of Daniel Pipes and Robert Spencer and have miserably (deliberately) failed! In fact they have subscribed to the views of these two critics with special reference to the 7 Recitations of Quran, which according to Ghamdi and his teachers are practices of Juhul and have no place in Islam.

Javaid Ahmad Ghamdi is just a child regarding the scholistic reading of Islam and Quran. Briefly speaking, no one could understand Islam and teachings of Quran better than Sir Syed, Iqbal and Allam Ghullam Ahmad Parvez. So called intellectuals like Dr Israr, Modoudi etc missed the central focus of Quranic teachings while delving into Hadith stories.

i think u r right asim. but the advantage of Ghamidi is that he delivers his message more in the form people like. as Pervez, iqbal and sir syed they were very critical on the existing beliefs,so the mullas turned against them,i myself find it great pity,that people like pervez,iqbal,farahi are not well appreciated by our mullas n common people.i myself read pervez and i think,its the most practicle view of islam given by him after iqbal n sir syed.i wish that i could find out people having that islamic views or a group who is working on that principles.

@Malik
would u pls define the term Munkarin e Hadith,as according tomy knowledge imam Bukhari has rejected more than 6 lacs of Hadith while compiling his collection of Hadith.
abt ur other objections it seems so that u r believing on the teachings spread by your scholars,u even dont bother to open Quran urself and read it with some understanding except getting SAWAB.

Ghamdi would like to establish a society who believe in Islam as a combination of Madhab and Deen in one step which is very impossible because of that these are both anti to each other. He would like to become popular in the prevailing system and in modern society as well as in the youngsters like as Maulana Maududi. He would like to become a scholar at the level of Zakir Naik who has also pushed Islam back to 100 years at the stage when the World was going near to real Islam. These are hinderances of Islam.

Islam is a Challenge to Religion, this very statement is the essence of J.A. Ghamdi’s discourse; unfortunately he gets too wordy and does not come out outrightly to redefine the parameters of Deen vs Religion. It is Deen (the definition of which unfortunately cannot be articulated in a few sentences ) which Allah states as being made simple (being a set evolving Universal laws as indicated by Quran ) . It is by no means the Number 2 Islam which is in fact a religion, weaved and fabricated by the Mullahs traditionalist mentality. I hope someday we can set up our schooling system, the syllabus and the curricula around Islam as a deen, and of free interpretation that will lead our young to let go of religion and ritual and see Islam as a constitutional ideology, only adhering to which , which requires fulfilling ones potential as a human being and doing collective good for humanity and doing good towards the established system, will lead us to collective salvation.

AOA All
Well ! i would like to give a little response to brother Malik. Let me mention here that i am not from any sect i prefer to call myself Muslim and an unbiased seeker and student of Islam.
I have read Mr. Ghamidi and i think that you need to read carefully about the things he has “rejected” in ur view. I believe he has tried to give them a real understanding. as far as i know he does not reject Hadith but rejects Zaeef Ahadith which was done by all of our Imams. He does not reject Hijab, but the kind of hijab we are following today with no “haya” in hearts. I am living in Malaysia, where almost every girl wears Scarf, but at the same time she wears T-shirt and jeans. this is what we can see in pakistan and other parts of the world where the emphasis is given on covering one’s head. the result is that girls do cover there head but many of them forget to “cover” their hearts, and eyes and follow the preechings of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) regarding clothes. which is the real message of Hijab. and this is what i believe Mr. Ghamidi Says regarding Hijab.
As far as Hadood ordinance or Had is cocerned, again i suppose you need to read carefully what he says about these issues.what i believe u have’nt read his writings and heard things from your surroundings. The correct way to respond to any scholarly work is to respond with logic and careful and unbiased analysis. Knowledge does not care about emotions. One has to accpet what is right and what is wrong wholeheartedly.
And who will decide what is right and what is wrong? AFTER CAREFUL, UNBIASED RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS it is ur heart which will decide what is right and what is wrong for you and if your heart is satisfied on some thing then i believe that God will not punish you for that. because you have done all you can to get the truth (with unbiasness and sincerity) and this is all a human being can do.
So i believe that every body of us who disagree with any scholar should not just say bad things about him, but should read and analyse his preechings and then respond to him. this way our response will not only be thoughtful but it will have an impact as well.
May Allah help and Guide us towards the right path. amen

Assalamo Alaikum to all
Well, I was in the state of accepting and denial that whether Ghamdi is a true scholar or not? Me and my room mate are almost daily discussing things relating to Islam in which speeches by Ghamdi also come under discussion. I have very few questions which I would like to get answers from some one…
I heard Ghamddi on many occasions but every time it happened that I had to stop after 5 minutes or before 5 minutes. Reason that there are so many things which even a common man who has very small knowledge of Quran, Sunnah and Ahadith will say that Ghamdi is not interpreting things as they are. Even those things on which whole Ummah has no issue, Ghamdi is telling that his research is right and the whole ummah is wrong and was wrong from 1200 years. I am not saying that Ghamdi is saying things without any research, but how authentic his research can be when there are thousands of other schoalrs and reseracher (who may have more knoeledge than Ghamdi) say one thing and Ghamdi come out with another perspective of that thing.
There are so many topics on which I saw Ghamdi moving away from actual things, like, Azabay Kabar, sangsar, beard (Darhi), First revelation (pahli wahi), Wajibiat of Khutbay Jummah, etc etc..some things are not coming to my mind right now. I will share them as I will recall them…
On all aobove things, what I have researched so far, Ahadith are cleraly saying something different, Ummah is practicing what Ahadith saying, but the conclusion which Ghamdi took from hus researches is totally opposite t that thing…
I will give u all the examples that what is being practiced by Ummah, what Ahadith say, and what Ghamdi says in my next message.
May Allah show righht path to all of us…
ALlah Hafiz
I can

I am not in favor of Mr. Ghamidi but I would like to correct you on your concept about “consensus of ummah”.

Orders
——

First thing, in many of its ORDERS, Qur’an only determines the boundaries and leaves out its implementation on “amru-hum shura baina-hum” so that a legislative assembly forms laws within Qur’anic boundaries by looking into the requirements of current circumstances, problems and resources of the state by taking an example from practices of Mohammad P.B.U.H and his companions. That legislative assembly should consist of people who understand DEEN very well so the implementation should not violate the objectives of DEEN. and if that implementation violates and rules then majority does NOT remain an authority.

You need to understand the difference between “permanent” and “additional” social and economic values prior to discuss such issues.

BELIEFS
——-

Majority is NEVER an authority. There was a time when the entire world had an agreement that this earth was flat.

Qur’an has also criticised MAJORITY at several places. Only Qur’an is the authority when it says “La-ilaha-illa-Allah”.

“And if you obey MOST OF THOSE ON THE EARTH, they will mislead you far away from Allâh’s Path. They follow nothing but CONJECTURES, and they do nothing but lie.” Chapter 6 Verse 116

You would have gone through a lot of verses where Qur’an criticises like “most men thank not”, “most of them believe not”, “most of men are rebellious”, “most of them have no understanding” etc.

AOA All !
I will agree with Imran. adding up, i would like to say that there is a difference of approach towards interpretting Quran and Sunnah, which makes the difference. Now as Ghamidi says that for any issue, we should first refer to Quran. Quran is also of the same view. Secondly, when we will refer to Hadith, we will interpret it in the light of Quran. Secondly, we can not take one hadith about an issue and give our verdict. Rather we will take all the Ahadith on that topic and will see what actually is being said. Thirdly, because Haidth has a certain Context, so we will see that context as well. for exapmle, in one hadith Prophet Muhammed Said that a man should have his shalwar above his Toes. now if you take this as it is, u will say that one has to have his clothes above it. but now you will have to analyze why Prophet said so, because it is the sign of “Takabur”, arabs use to have such clothing showing “Takabur”. And in the light of Quran it is evident that Allah dont like “takabur”.
now you will see other Ahadith on this issue. one of which says that Hazrat Abu ?Bakr once said to Prophet that what should i do because my clothes go below my toes, Prophet Replied that “Maaz Allah you are not amongst the “Mutakabareen”
Now if you will only take one hadith, you will give ur verdict foolishly, secondly if you will give a verdict without studying the hadith in the light of Quran, you will never reach to its real teachings or core.
Thats what Ghamidi Says about all the issues.And for any logical sane person, this approach is right.
This is the difference between the conventional molvis and Ghamidi. Its not about the majority or minority, its about getting the truth. even if it goes against majority.
May Alah Guide us to the right path
Amen

actually for people like Ghamadi and Maodudi it is difficult to explain strange things in Islam, they either become apologetic or try denying some hadees…or finding logic in these absurd traditions….would ghamdi allow us to study the oldest book–compilation of sira and traditions by Ibne Ishaq, or that of ibne Saad, Tabari or waqidi?

lol, Tahir ul Qadri, a great scholar? You must be kidding me dude. The fact that he educates Military Leaders makes him a credible source of knowledge? Wait, are not these military leaders the one who play “band baja” when they are about to bury the martyred soldiers? Yes. So I can judge the teachings of mr Tahir ul Qadri from this.

Regarding, Mr Ghamidi, I have not read him much. But I just read his “tafseer” of Surah Fil, provided by someone. It seems that Mr Ghamidi is a rationalisit i.e. anything historical has to make sense in terms of what he knows about the scientific phenomenon. In doing so, he is re-interpreting history based on his understanding of the scientific principles of life. I personally would not like that approach and if Ghamidi, like mutazilites from Abbasid period, really wants to be a rationalist then he should bring unequivocal proof for the existence of God in addition to bringing proof for the miracle of Prophet Muhammad where water flowed from between his fingers for his caravan in the midst of a scorching desert. From my educational experience, water doesnt not flow out of a human’s body for someone else to drink. Even in extreme cases of edema, the stored water in the body is not “drinkable.”

Regarding the person who said that Arab culture should not be imposed on “our” Islam then I have to add that Prophet Muhammad pbuh was an Arab and not a South Asian. He first came for guiding Arabs and then the world. So we rather should be humble about our opportunity to achieve guidance from someone who was an Arab. So you want to maintain your culture? May I ask what type of culture are you talking about? Hinduism-influenced culture that pervades all the aspects of non-Arab pakistani culture? excessively superstitious (regarding spirits) attitude in cultural practices is prevalent in pakistanis and has been borrowed from Hinduism, even though belief in Allah is also a superstition for a rationalist, lets not discuss that sort of superstition at the moment.

I would like to add that ghamdi doesn’t believe in the second coming of HAZRAT ISA A.S and also that no one known as Hazrat Imam Mahdi.Well uptil now all genuine Islamic scholars have believed in the second coming of HAZRAT ISA A.S. but ghamdi thinks otherwise.I think that if one is propogating ISLAM then one should avoid of committing any mistakes even if its a single mistake like the above mentioned as it causes to lose the essence of one’s hardwork. An ISLAMIC SCHOLAR is not a politician who can commit biG MISTAKES!

By the help of Allah I have published many papers in the high ranking scientific journals as a material scientist and having the opportunity to work in advanced countries. For the last few years, I have also diverted my attention to learn more about our greatest religion Islam (Quran sunnah)read many books of our scholars and met many scholars in different countries. Scientific knowledge helped me a lot to understand/practice our religion. In my opinion Ghamdi is a great(if not greatest)scholar. We should respect all scholars and should listen to them with open mind.Thank you.

Yeah definitely agree with those who are saying that its our mistake that we are far away from the Arabic language which is aa necessity to learn for Muslims specially. If you all remember for the past 1300 or as most of the people quote it as 1400 years, any one in the world had to learn Arabic to gain the higher education – this was even the case for non-muslims. because highest education was possible only in the Islamic countries. History is an evidence for that. We are misleading because we can’t understand English. For the last 1400 years, all those Scholars and Aalim-e-Din, Mojadid, Wali-Allah were wrong and we are right. Because they never tried to look out of the box as majority are trying to explain here. aah going away from my actual point here.

I have read what Omer Iqbal is pushing every one to read “Islahi’s momentous work on Quran”
and further more before adding this comment, I consulted with English teacher as well and definitely going to check it with my English (American and British) clients and if required will post here as well.
The explanation where he rejected the fact that birds with stones in their mouth attacked on elephants mentioned in Sorah-e-Feel was for the verse whose translation is as mentioned below:

“And sent down against them swarms of birds?”

Can any one translate it and exaplain here that when “against them” can be used ? and specially when its been said that sending some one against them …
definitely its been used for some thing which is going to resist, which is going to react back, or which is standing against you. not against the dead bodies to clean the area. Doesn’t it sounds illogical that people who can’t translate the egnlish are translating the Quran.

I am not saying he is not a scholar but definitely I am against his preachings. Its not like he is trying to fit the Islam in modernism but because his explanations and research is baseless.

forget about every thing, just imagine a nation who remained super power for more than 1300 years or 1400 years was following an incomplete religion. Why they ruled the world with peace? Were they not dealing with the latest challenges of the modernism? As mentioned many times by ghamdi that Islam is not a complete religion while I can still find solutions to my problems through Quran & Sunnah. I am always amazed to see that how amazing this religion is which is perfect for all the times.

Its our ignorance and who ever is writing in this post in favor of ghamdi is not actually searching for an answer but believing on what other’s are saying as mentioned in the 2nd or 3rd paragraph by the author. Instead do your study and then come up with your thoughts and then we it would be for the benefit of every one.

Does any one know how this ghamdi is funded? you will be amazed with the actuall facts :) Jewish/English are supporting him just like they supported “mirza qadiyani”. mirza qadiyani agreed this in his books.

Mr. Ghamidi’s programs should be telecasted from all tv chennels and radio chennels. His interpretations are true Quranic and real. However his interpretations of IBADAT, PRESTASH,Imtehan need to be reviewed by him.

I have read an article on a website about Eid Qurban which I reproduce below for benefit of all and also for comments.

‘SACRIFICING ANIMALS

Muslims become a laughing stock of the world and waste billions of dollars every year when they slaughter animals, generally on streets. This pagan practice is nowhere ordained in the Qur’an.
Slaughtering millions of animals on a single day grievously hurts the productivity of potential animal generations, an important food and industrial resource.
Udhia = Qurbani = Animal Sacrifice. Blood sacrifice is strictly a Pagan and Biblical ritual supposed to please God. He does not prescribe it at all. Only camels may be slaughtered at Hajj, and only in Makkah for the pilgrims to host one another (22:36). NAHR strictly refers to the sacrifice of a camel.
IS ANIMAL SACRIFICING THE COMMEMORATION OF HAZRAT IBRAHIM? There is a rampant belief among Muslims that they slaughter animals, sheep, goat, cow, camel in memory of Ibrahim’s a. s. attempted slaughter of his son Ismail a.s. – That Allah saved Ismael a. s. by replacing him with a ram sent from heaven. Does Allah play games with His servants? How much more Biblical can one get?
THE MOMENTOUS SACRIFICE – NO RAM, NO ANIMAL:
37:102 And when he was old enough to strive along with him, Abraham said, “O My dear son! I have a vision that I must give you to a life of test and tribulation for a Noble cause. So look, what do you think?” He said, “O My father! Do what you are commanded. God willing, you will find me of the steadfast.” [‘Zibh’ & ‘Zabh’ = Sacrifice = Disregarding comfort for a Noble cause]
37:103 As both of them had surrendered themselves (to Allah), he made Ismail prostrate on his forehead in gratitude. [Contrary to popular tradition Abraham never envisioned or intended to slaughter his son]
37:106 This was indeed a Trial, clear in itself.
[Leaving the prestigious office of Chief Priesthood in Babylon and now the comfort of Syria for the wilderness of the valley of Makkah]
37:107 We exchanged his life for a Momentous Sacrifice. [Please notice here the absence of the Biblical and the traditional myth of a ‘ram’ sent from the heavens. Also, note that slaughtering of a sheep or goat, by no means, can be considered a Momentous Sacrifice. 14:37, 37:102]
WHY SHOULD WE CELEBRATE EID-UL-ADHHA?
Because it is the culmination of Hajj designed to be the Glorious Annual International Conference of all humanity to foster brotherhood, justice and equity among all nations, and devise ways to make this planet a better place to live. Think of the United Nations with all its failures in justice and equity. How about United Mankind with Divinely directed morality, brotherhood and justice? (2:196-203, 3:96-97, 22:27-28). Currently the high institution of Hajj has been reduced to a senseless ritual involving much chaos, waste of wealth and person with pagan activities going on. Yet, contrary to the Qur’an, most Muslims think that “performing” Hajj will erase all their sins of a lifetime and make them sinless as if they were newly born!

An important note: Although the Saudi government forbids non-Muslims to come to Makkah and Madinah, this practice is contrary to the Qur’an. The idolaters are forbidden only to ‘ya’mur’ or administer the Masjid for obvious ideological reasons. (9:17-18). In fact, they must be allowed to come and witness the benefits of the unity of mankind. (22:27-28)’

if u want to know more about ghamdi den study da book of Hafiz Zubair.a scholar of Tanzeem e islami lAHORE.Dr.Israr n his scholars answered ghamidi in a book FIKAR E GHAMIDI.he reported many vague vies in it about homosexuality n Women vail.Plssssssssssssssssss Study this book.Adress 36-k model town Lahore.Office of Tanzee e islami.

I had been reading from many non-Islamic sites before and was influenced by their criticism of Islam and Prophet Muhammad (pbuh. These sites were using ahadith from sahih collections to prove their case and in those days I found myself in a very hopeless situation. I had even started entertaining thoughts of apostatizing. This is when Allah’s help reached me and I was exposed to Mr. Ghamdi’s and his affiliates views. Their method of explaining things and the rationality in which the whole exegesis was rooted definitely helped me. The doubts started to clear up and my iman started to grow. Their explanation of the difference between hadith and sunnah only made sense even though before I believed that the two terms were interchangeable.

I understand that people find this opinion of his very questionable but if only we knew the kind of irrational beliefs we would have to defend if we are to hold the traditionalist view we would surely have done what I did. But since most of us do not know what is there to be found in many sahih ahadith we just imagine that they must all be in conformity with the Quran. I don’t blame you but make a simple request to all who read this post of mine. Please do not label someone as a kafir, a deviant etc. just based on what you know about him from hearsay. Try to understand the other person’s point of view and if you have to disagree do it the nicest manner possible.

I found Mr Ghamdi’s discourse on his own book Meezan very useful. It is available as audio files on one of his sites. Regards

why not avoid labeling any body kafir and leave it to Allah who is the real authority. I do not find any ofence in Mr. Ghamidi’s opinions. It is his own view which can not change Quran, Hadith or Sunnah of Prophet (saws). What Mr. Ghamidi should do is to refer to Quran and Hadith more freely in his discourses. Recently while listening to his program about Hadith on Geo tv traditional question about Hadiths came up i.e. many ahadith are forgery so they can not be relied upon and so the whole collection should be discarded. Mr. Ghamidi started explaining his 18 years study of Hadith and ‘Ilm ur rijal’.A simple statement could solve the whole issue for good and I am writing it down here for the benefit of all. ” It is true that many forged Hadiths have been added to this collection we have but do not treat it as waste paper. Instead show the attitude of a jeweler whose good pearls got mixed with fake pearls. He dose not throw them away but makes every effort to separate carefully good ones from the bad ones. Still he dose not throw away the fake ones he has separated lest some reals ones he may not have missed. Even false Ahadith start with the beloved name of our Prophet (saws)”

In very breaf he(Ghamdi Sb)open a sensitive debate in atleest South Asian Muslim communuty. But there is a great concern about accapting him or dinail. I think we need to be very carefull about the faith unless the traditional views are explained in the same manner as he did. every thing depend on their approch, we need to grab wether his approch is correct which is the base of his reform. Here I sould request him to find out their error. I pray for him to find the way if he is not intentionly miss guided.

GAMDHI IS THE ONLY PERSON AFTER SAHABA IKRM WHO PRESENTED ISLAM IN ITS ORIGINAL SHAPE ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;MOST OF OTHERS GREAT MULANAS EXPLAINED ISLAM IN SUCH A WAY THAT WE MUSLIMS LOOK LIKE JOKERS IN THIS WORLD;;;;;;WE ARE OBJECTING ON EVERRY MODREN THING & USING /DOING SAME THING;;;;;;;;;;;;;;IT MEANS ISLAM IS NOT PRACTCAL AT ALL;;;;;; ISLAM IS THE ONLY PRACTICAL RELIGION IN THIS WORLD &WILL REMAIN . ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;DONT BE SO IGNORANT LISTEN &READ HIM CAREFULLY BEFORE OBJECTION;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;ISLAM GIVE MDERATION IN EVERY ASPECT OF LIFE.============
Most of the work of Great scholars of islam is excellent & a big benifit but Most of great scholars (including ABU HANIFA/SHAFI/GZALI/BUKHARI/SHAH WALI ULLAH/KHUMINI/MAUDOODI ETC) explanations aboutCONTRAVERCIAL ISSUUES is misleading &that made this natural religion totally unnatural

ISLAM IS NOT ENEMY OF THESE following BEAUTIFUL EMOTIONS OF HUMAN BEING LIKE;;;;;;;;;;;;;; ,MUSIC ,POETRY,ART ,DRAMA ,PAINTING ,ACTING ,SINGING ;but WE SHOULD UNDERSTAND TAHT ISLAM DOES NOT ALLOW;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;IMMORAL/NUDITY/VULGARITY& IN ANY THING;;;;;;;;;;;;;.Every fun /thing except wine/pig/gambling (&few more things which ae in Quran);;;;;;;;;;are allowed in its good form in hadood &qayood;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;i wll give you example;;;tell me if one IMAM in is provoking firqa bandi/FITNA in MOSQUE ,Will u demolish mosque or adivse that person what is his hadood &qyaood ;;;;;;;;;;same thing is in islam in every profession……….whatevere it is.Pleit is to make fun of ISLAM SYAING music,tasweer &fanoona latifa are HARAM in islam;;;;;; EVERY ONE KNOWS WHAT BAD/NUDE /IMMORAL MUSIC &BAD DRAMA IS ,
WE ALL WILL SAY THAT IS WRONG .
TASWEER /PHOTOGRAPH/PAINTING IS ONLY BAD IF PURPOSE OF THAT TASWEER /PAINTNG IS WORSHIPPING&OR CHANCE OF WORSHIPPING THAT TASWEER;There is no concept of ALIVE &DEAD PHOTOGRAPHS ___________that is totally diff context in QURAN ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;THERE IS NO COTRAVERSY ABOUT THESE
Due to wrong interpretation of JIHAD by very well renound islamic scholars ;(that ISLAM WANT GALBA WITH SWORD);WE HAVE IN A POSTION OF BEING STUPID IN THIS WORLD NOW .
SURAT TUUABA IN QURAN ONLY REVILES ABOUT ZAHOOR OF RASOOL AT THAT TIME & ALLAH TOLD PEOPLE THAT HE CAN SHOW ZAZA &SAZA IN THIS WORLD .IT WAS ZAHOORE NUBUAT .,
AZHAR;;;;;;;;; IF YOU READ HISTORY YOU WILL REALISE THAT EVEN GREAT KHALIPS AFTER PROPHET ONLY SEND THESE MASSAGES (ISLAM KABOOL KAROO,YA ZAZIA DO YA LARNE KA LIYA TAYYAR HO JAU)TO THOSE COUNTRIES/KINGDOMS WHOM OUR PROPHET MUHAMMAMAD (PUB) GAVE WARNING &WROTE WARNING LETTERS .ALLAH WANTED TO SHOW HIS POWER &ZAHOORE NUBUAT AT THAT TIME ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;NOW SPREAD OF ISLAM IS ONLY BY PREACH&AMALI NUMUNA”””””””””””’JIHAD IS ONLY IN A SITUATION OF APPRESSION;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;AS A MUSLIM WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO KILL ANY INNOCENT PERSON EVEN IF HE IS THE CITIZEN OF COUNTRY OF ARMY OF ENEMY;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;THINK WHERE WE ARE NOW;;;WHAT IS HAPPENING ””””””””””””””’ISALM IS NOT DROOGA THAT TAKE A STICK &TELL EVERYONE WHAT TO DO;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;INSTEAD ISLAM IS A BEAUTIFUL DAWOOT /TABLIGH;;;;;;;TELL ABOUT HIQEEQAT OF DUNYA& AKRAT &LEAVE IT TO THAT PERSON ;;;;;;;;CAN YOU IMAGINE TO ANY PERSON TO LIVE WITHOUT LINKING THIS WORLD WITH THEREAFTER;;;;;;;;;BUT IF YOU CONVEY THE MASSAGE PROPERLY IT WILL BE DELIVERED;

I was always restless after hearing /reading diff TRASLATIONS OF QURAN& HADITH from diff scholars of islam including MOST OF FAMOUS ONE .I AM NOT SAYING THAT ALL OF THEIR WORK WAS WRONG OR THEIR NIYAT WAS NOT CLEAN).But I must say that thier concept about most contraversial issues of islam was not clear&that made/presented our beautiful DEEN Islam like a joke&(gaar fitree ) religion.
javed Ahmed Gamdi has realy properly undrstood&has a capacity to explain &elaborate it so clearly that it looks like that Islam is realy last DEEN of Allah ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
After listening to his explanations about matters of islam/about JIHAD/HADITH/TASWEER/PARDA/HIJAB/MUSIC/POHTOGRAPHY/SCIENCE/WORLD/THERAFTER/ZAZA/SAZA/ABADAT/RASALAT/YAQEEN/DEEN/DUNYA/LIFESTYLE/MORALS/LIFE/DEATH/FAMILY;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;ALMOST ALL PARTS OF LIFE;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;YOU CANNOT BE ANYOTHER THING OTHER THAN MUSLIM.
He would be wrong on few occasion like all other human beings but his opinion about contraversial issues is a great work which was nevere done like this;;;;;;;He has explained how you understand a Hadith in the light of Quran AND THAT IS REAL ISLAM
PLEASE READ HIM /LISTEN HIM CAREFULLY BEFORE MAKING AN OPINION
MAY YOU CHANGE YOUR OPINION &MIND
PLEASE DONT JUDGE BOOK FROM ITS COVER;;;;;;;TRY TO EXPLORE IT
JUST READ TWO;BOOKS ON ONE TOPIC OF HIM&ANY OTHER SCHOLAR YOU WILL UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;IN MY OPINION HE IS THE GREATEST SCHOLAR OF ISLAM EVER BORN after Sahaba ikram .
IT IS NOT EXAGGERATION IT IS REALITY;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;JUST LISTEN AND READ HIM CAEFULLY IN THE LIGHT OF QURAN HADITH &YOUR WISDOM;;;;
THANKS

Assalamu alaikum,
In my opinion, masha Allah you don a lot of spending for this subject. What about the al-Kashaaf: al-Zamakhshari, have you heard about his knowledge. Muslims of any madhab do the same respect of him but none of them agreed with his ideology perhaps a few, I never saw any. let me say he(Ghamidi Sahib) don a great effort in Islamic Sciences, opens many doors of mind, but if I tell you the other side, he is still live and may considers his forthcoming towards understanding and approach. I would say Zamakhshari do the least failure towards, but that time people were aware knowledge loving but not like us in identifying the true knowledge.

My point is that muhammad (sallallah e alihie wa aalehi wasalam)was appointed to remind about need of unbiased learning and arabs being fair enough to grab the point. They responded towards the right direction-though after hard efforts of belivers- but u see this unbiased knowledge and learning brought the sweetest fruits for humanity.

what is wrong with ghamidi?
the only thing which makes him unacceptable for some is that he himself believes in the same approach and reminds us to follow the same!!

may be many people don’t agree with him but it must be negated in a good way furnishing ones criticism with strong arguments from quran & sunnah…

saying some thing (for example every one claims the supermacy of qurran & sunnah in their education system) and believing in the other thing (but unfortunately most of madaris are functioning as flags holders of estabilshed schools of thought).This is the major problem and these scholors after becoming part of main stream, represent their clan and unfortunatly they some time don’t accept the supermacy of allah’s quran over the fatwa of their beloved imam..

Kindly promote the culture where we can claim that rule of allah is supreme in our education and learning.

Are you aware of the Ayah ” Summun Bukmun Fahum La Yubsaroon”? Obvoiusly, you have either ever read Allama Ghamidi or watched the movie ” Khuda Ke Lia’e. It was only suggested in some circles that Naseeruddin Shah’s character was based on Allama Ghamidi. He never appeared in the movie. Is Nawa-e-Waqat the sole source of “intellectual stimulation ” for you?

By keeping discussion in mind I will like to share a website http://zakirnaikblog.blogspot.com which is a website about great islamic scholar Zakir Naik who made a lot oif non muslims to accept islam by his speeches.

I’ll discuss why this question of ‘true scholar’ arose in first place.

To me there are two reasons:

1. There is a history to it. This question was asked for Sir Syed, Abul Kalam, Dr. Iqbal and Maududi all have been judged like Ghamidi by one or the other group. Why? Because we have few institutions that are credible enough to enjoy the respect of vast majority of Muslims, like patients in Pakistan place highly an advice of a doctor affiliated with college of phycisian (CPSP). But there is nothing of this sort when it comes to Islamic expertise. Hence lay Muslim finds it hard to find one satisfying answer to her/his confusions. So we need an highly credible institution.

Secondly, because… we consider ourselves more knowledgeable than Almighty. We directly jump to ‘neeyat’ (intentions)… Skipping all steps of reading, understanding and identifying weaknesses in line of argument, if any..(a judgement? No, current discussion has ample evidence of this).

Contrarily, the fact is that in academics reaching a wrong conclusion while trying to understand something is one thing and distorting the fact is another. Former, a mistake, is common occurance among scholars but later, a henious academic crime, fortunately rare. But but most unfortunately, we consider first possibility way much less as an option. Examples can easily be quoted from the recent and distant past that scholars diasgreed with veiwpoints but never labelled eachother as ‘agents’ or whatever. So why we doubt on ‘neeyat’ (intentions) in the first instance when it is only known by Almighty?

Many have considered source funding as measure of intensions. Should we turn a deaf ear and blind eye to a sound argument if the research is funded by ‘dubious’ sources or on the other ‘cleaner’ funding source make a weak argument worth considering?

This goes back to the origin of the blog that most don’t study the scholar but using one’s previous knowledge comment on the conclusion with an assumption that their previous knowledge is ‘prefect’.

While a number of posts are good that they diagree on some firmer grounds but unfortunately many are judgemental and reject the conclusion instead of discussing the reasoning adopted by the scholar to reach that conlcusion.

It is evident that most of us first badly need to learn ‘how to learn in an unbiased manner’ and then ‘how to differ respectfully and objectively’.

Let’s pray that Almighty guide us to become an unbiased learners, a polite disagreers and positive individuals, aameen.

By the way most of the great people were persecuted or underestimated by the majority of the people of their times and later generations, after attaining sufficient maturity, realized their worth… so it is history cycle, we must not worry about it much… time will tell.

Also the yardstick at the day of resurrection will not be ‘who believed in Ghamidi or not’ but whether one did his ‘BEST’ to learn in an unbiased manner AND then acted accordingly to the best of her/his capacity.

Ghamidi is somewhat inspired by Ahmadis/Qadianis belief though he never accepts e.g., Death of Jesus Christ and negating that he was raised to heavens bodily. Ahmadis brought this belief for the firsttime in history of Islam.
Secondly, the very reason ahmadis are decalred non-muslim was their stand on possibility of a coming of a non-law bearing prophet (under Sharia e Muhammadi, without affecting finality of Prophet Muhammad). Ghamidi is very much supportive of this theory.

In fact, We, the Pakistanis learn Islam mainly from our traditional Ulmas(molvees) who didnot realise us the spirit of Islam nor they create a true Islamic culture in our country. Rather our religious leaders themselves indulged in extreme activities which created extremism and terrorism. Our religious elite never thought of improving our ethical values, tolerance and patience which are the basis of Islam. Have our traditional ulmas succeeded in reforming our society, the worst form of terrorism prevailing in present scenario would not be happened. Javed Ahmad Ghamdi is one of those scholars who presented a true picture of Islam that’s why our young generation particularly like him and is satisfied with his teachings.

No doubt, Javed Ahmed Ghamdi is the greatest scholar of the mordern era. He speaks with reason and reference. He presents Islam with reason. He, with his writings and words, brings a lot of respect, not only for himself, but for his religion, his prophet and his book, but his opponents talk without any wisdom, reason, and they bring bad name to Islam, its prophet, and its book. May God give wisdom to the opponents of Ghamdi Sahib, and save Ghamdi Sahib from the blood-thirsty jaws of the extremist mullahs.
This is very unfortunate that Islam has not produced many scholars of the caliber of Javed Ahmed Ghamdi. Unfortunately, the center stage is occupied by the unwise, uneducated, ignorant, and self-declared scholars of Islam.
May God save Islam and Pakistan from these Mullahs.

I have read some of the discussion above. I think it is good that a lot of people in this era want to know the right path i.e. who is right and who is wrong, what is right and what is wrong. I think if someone is really in search of the right path, Allah Subhana-wa-taala shows him the right path. Please carry on your struggle to find the right path and also pray for it. . When you will read someone after this prayer, Allah Subhana-wa-taala will tell your heart that who is saying the right thing and who is saying the wrong one. Be sincere to Allah and yourself for want of the right path. This is, I think, one of the way to find the right path and when you find the right path please try to follow it. Please carry on reading scholars deeply especially try to learn what Allah Subhana-wa-taala wants us to do, and when you learn this thing try to do what He wants. I am not commenting on anyone’s views. I am sharing my views just because i like you all due to your search for the right path. May Allah Subhana-wa-taala shows all of the right path. Muniruddin

Javed Ahmed Ghamdi is a great schollar but unfortunately we are not benefiting from his works and person. We have history of such failings. Let us have look at recent past. Seyd Ahmed Khan was opposed by his own people and was given name of naturi. Allama Iqbal was opposed. An d we know what treatment was metted to Muhammad Ali Jinnah.
In recent past we had a great scholar of Quran Mr. Allama Ghulam Ahmed Parvez, whos works include more then 50 books and a large volume of lectures. But he was opposed by Mullas and fatwas of kufr were issued by ignorant Molvis.
Presently thee many more interllectuals like Dr. Shabbir Ahmed (California), Azizullah Bohio (Nawab Shah), Dr Rafique (Lahore) but all of them are little known.
Barring a small percentage muslims are under dominance of ignorant Mullas who are strongly and firmly established in mosques and madrassas with might funds and financing, propaganda machinery, lethel fanatics. It is rather impossible and unthinkable to expect that reason will p[revail. The only hope is that Mulla might be elliminated by its own follies.
Mr Ghamdi’s efforts are laudable and it will be very unfortunate if we do not make use of this scholar. One might differ on some points but it does not mean that we outrightly oppose him. His few approaches are quite harmony with Allama Ghulam Ahmed Parvez. All these schollars have done great services to Quran and Islam and we must make use of them with open mind.
Nazir Hussain, Rawalpindi

Plz don’t mak such type of blogs. wich distribute our nation. When i clik on dis page n i read ur Q? Den i don’t like 2 read ur ans. Cuz i don’t like hear about our best scholar. You should not distribute our nation. So, 4 god sake never written such type of blog next time.

Those hills are still exist there and bring just one Elephant under those hills. And show me to kill that ONE elephant by mere throwing rocks from the hill top.

To help you, 1) there should be thousands of rocks all over the hill top each of a tennis ball size. 2)There should be hundreds of men to throw those rocks. 3) There should be enormous power in the arms of those men to continuously “shower” those rocks onto the army of Elephants to make as crushed as in Sura e Feel.

Ghamdi is a big time Idiot and a stupid Deviant ……. his followers just don’t use there minds. PERIOD !! (don’t abuse me in respose rather try to understand this sad reality)

you seems to be the bootlicker of molana tariq jameel. & tableeghi jamaat. Tableegi jamaat which is a fitna like all other sectarian mulahs. Ghamdi sahib is always logial, logic cannot digest by you folowers of tariq jameel & taqleed. because ou tableeghis & other sectrian people are brainless animal.

I have read various Tafaseers of Quran and have listened Mr. Javed Ahmed Ghamdi on various issues. I firmly believe that Mr. Ghamdi is a great scholar of our times, always argue with a deep rooted research and proper well established references.
Today the so called “Ulema-e-Karam” (religious scholars) have painted a very gloomy and bad picture of our great religion, they have devided the nations on very pitty issues. They are narrow minded and self centred scholars, who dont accept other point of view. In this scenerio the scholars like Mr Ghamdi are a light of hope.

There are 04 Imams and on certain issues they are 180 degrees, do we have the authority to label them Kafir / Non-believer or anti islamic. Rationality demands that Muslims must try to seek knwoledge of Arabic which will allow us to understand Quran in a better way. Certainly not everything Ghamdi Sb. say is accepted niether can we reject everything he says.

this is only for People of Pakistan (present time)
I only want to comment again that as a impartial person ;;;;;;; I would like to say that we already are dysfuctional society but we WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO PUT OUR LAME EXCUSE ON THE DAY OF JUDGEMENT BESIDES ALLAH THAT WE DID NOT HAVE GOOD LEADER &GOOD ISLAMIC SCHOLAR THAT,S WHY WE COULD NOT UNDERSTAND ISLAM &COULD NOT CHANGE OUT COUNTRY.

HE ALMIGHTY HAS BLESSED US PAKISTANIS BIGGEST SCHOLAR OF ISLAM EVER (JAVED AHMED GHAMDI)& BIGGEST POLITICAL LEADER (IMRAN KHAN) IN PRESENT HISTORY OF ISLAMIC COUNTRIES
RAO

We can’t believe on everything he said. He also should listen criticism and correct himself if wrong. i listened his many lectures and i found one error “in explanation about the AYA’S, he always say to describe it according to the scene, and sometime call it an example to show the law. and sometime deny it coz it is just for that scenario not for all the times.” This is always confusing in his teachings regarding this thing.

Salam , Auzubillah….”Whosoever opposes the messenger after the clarity of right path, and then follows a way different from all believers: We shall let him go where he chooses, and then burn him in Hell.”(Al-Quran: 04:115)

Salam, auzubillah…”People who differ between Allah & His Prophets, and say that ‘We believe in some and reject some’, and they want to devise a path from in between the given; these are the actual disbelievers.” (Al-Quran 04:151)

THE DEBATE HAS BEEN VERY ENLIGHTINING. I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE COMMENTS MADE BY MOST OF THE PEOPLE . I WILL LIKE TO MENTION A FEW THINGHS HERE BEFORE ADDING MY COMMENTS ON SOME OF THE ISSUES MENTIONED.
.* AROUND 60 YEARS AFTER THE DEATH OF PROPHET (SOS) THE MUSLIM STATE ESTABLISHID BY THE KHULFAIA RASHDA WAS SUDDENLY CONVERTED INTO A KINGDOM WHERE KING WAS NOT BE QUESTIONED , ENJOYED ABSOLUTE AUTHORITY, EVEN ENJOYED POWER TO ELIMINATE ANYONE WITHOUT ANY JUDICIAL PROCES BEING FOLLOWED , HAD THE POWER TO SPEND MONEY AS HE WISHED AND SO ON ——- WERE THEY FOLLOWING THE PROPHETS (SOS) SUNNA.

* IT WAS DURING THEIR REGION THAT HADEES WERE WRITTEN AND COLLECTE AND THIS PROCESS CONTINUED FOR MANY YEARS. THOSE WHOSE NAMES WERE MENTIONED AS ORIGINAL SOURCE OF THOSE HADEES WERE NOT ALIVE. A GREAT EFFORT WAS MADE BY SCHOLARS OF HADEES TO ESTABLISH THERE AUTHANTICITY .THERE HAVE BEEN DOUBT ABOUT THE AUTHONTICITY OF MANY OF THEM WHEN CHECKED AGAINST THE VERSES OF HOLY QURAN AND KNOWN SUNNA OF PROPHET (SOS) iMAM BUKHARI REJECTED ABOUT 6LAKH HADEES. DOES THIS NOT SPEAK ABOUT THE RELIABILITY OF A LARGE NUMBER OF RAVIES OF THE REJECTED HADEES WHO WERE USING THE NAMES OF THE REVERED PEOPLE TO PUSH THIER VERSIONS AS HADEES. IS THERE NOT THE POSSIBILITY OF WEAK HADEES BEING ACCEPTED AS THERE MIGHT BE SOME RELUCTANCE ON REJECTING THEM OUT RIGHT. IF SCOLORS QUESTION THEM NOW THEN WHAT IS SO WRONG!
*EXAMPLE — DONOT WORK AGAINST YOUR RULER EVEN IF HE IS CORUPT,DEBOUTCH OR TYRANT (these are not the exact words, but gives the meaning of the hadees) THIS HAS BEEN USED BY MULLAS TO SAVE THE KINGS, RULERS AND DICTATORS IN MUSLIM COUNTRIES.
DAN ANY ONE IN HIS RIGHT MIND BELIEVE THAT PROPHET (SOS) WOULD HAVE TOLD HIS FOLLOWERS TO FOLLOW THIS, WHO HIMSELF WAS AGAINST ALL FORM OF OPPRESIVE TENDENCIES.
* THERE OTHER MATTERS WHICH NEED CRITICAL AND ANALYTICAL THINKING
REQUIRED TO RAISE THE QUESTIONS AND SEEK ANSWERS. THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE ANSWERS PROVIDED WITH KNOWLEDGE OF 1000 YEARS OLDMAY NOT BE ACCEPTABLE , BUT MULLAS AND THE WAY THEY MADE OTHERS BELIEVE ARE NOT READT TO LISTEN TO THESE QUESTIONS,
EARTH IS NOT THE CENTER OF UNIVERSE, IT IS NOT THE CENTER OF SOLAR SYSTEM,

*MOON IS NOT A SMALL THING IT IS A PLANET BOUND BY GRAVITATIONAL FORCE OF EARTH, IF IT BREAKS INTO TWO PARTS THE WHOLE SYSTEM WILL BE DISTURBED. MOVOING ITHE TWO PARTS AWAY AND THEN JOINING THEM —

* SUN — EARTH IS MOVING AROUND SUN . HOW CAN IT BE STOPPED OR RETRACT ITS PATH! TO BE COTINUED

* EARTH IS A VERY TINY ONJECT IN THE UNIVERSE. UNIVERSE CONSISTS OF A LARGE NUMBER OF GALAXIES , EACH GALAXY CONSIST OF MILLIONS OF STARS,
MOST OF THESE STARS ARE LARGE AS COMPARED TO OUR SUN. THUS SUN IS
ONE AMONG THE MILLIONS OF STARS IN ONE GALAXY. THERE AREE MANY PLANETS MOVING AROUND THIS SUN . EARTH IS ONE OF THEM .
GOD IS THE CEATER OF THE UNIVERSE. THIS IS OUR CONCEPT OF GOD/ALLAH.
( This is not like the gods of hindues who are residing in himalayas)
1500 years back they were knowledgeable about astronomy and movement of stars
but not the way we know it now. They were not knowing that the earth is not flat, but is round in the form of a sphere and is rotating on its own axis as well as rotating around Sun. These rotations around the Sun are periodic and so is the rotation about its own axis. The creator of the universe has designed the and put it into operation also.
thing on such a scale are moving following certain laws and not on some whims and fancy.
.God has given wisdom to men to see them , to study them ,to discover the principles and laws on which they are opperating, appreciate them , appreciate the beauty , the ceativity with wich they have been made to work and sustaining it –from how long and for how long.
On this tiny planet called EARTH live a large number of species. This number itself is very large— animals, birds , fish and other form of living things insects etc One of the living thing is MAN.
Man on and off has imagined himself to be GOD. History of mankind tells how at vaious times people started considering themselves as GOD and oppressed people, used tyrony and what. They finally got annhiliated.
Prophet Mohammad (sos) introduced GOD as REHMAN and RAHIM. ,All Muslims belongoing to any race, region , country when ever begins any good work or recite any Quranic verse starts IN THE NAME OF ALLAH THE MOST MERCIFUL AND BENIFICIENT.
But see that every Muslim especially the Mullas and their followers themselves are behaving as if they are GOD. Any one who doesnot agree with them or who says something not acceptable to them — eliminate ( kill him )
If GOD had followed this approach He would have destroyed all those who were not following HIs tenants long back , instead of sendinig 124000 prophets to bring people on the right path .
So for GOD sake refrain from being harsh on them who have a different point of view
a different interpretation . This should be appreciated that many of Mohammads (sos) revelations have historical context and they should be seen in that reference in oder to grasp there true moral import. Blinding applying them even distorts things and creats a caos and make muslims deviate from the true path yhey were supposed to follow.
Dr Israr Ahmed when he speaks about the Quranic verse ” Kafiron ko ayse marrow ki unki ankhon main khof dikhne lage—- : does not expicitly tells the audience that this was revealed at a specific time on the occasion of battle when kuffars were continuing attrocities against muslims
was at the time of one the battles when kuffars cotinued their attrocities against muslims. As a result, Maulvies in madasas

Anwar Faiyaz continued—-
Maulvies in madarsas teach this as if it is applicable even now. People in India from other community who have heard him and others are worried that if muslims are in position of power they would this.
*Discourse with Mr Javed Ghamdi must be seen in this back gound and also of all those who are
trying to throw new lights in the interpretation of Quran and Sunna.
*Last thing I will like to mention is about the LAST SERMON OF PROPHET MOHAMMAD.

I will request Mr Javed Ghamdi and all of those who have knowledgs and resources to kindly
translate it verbatim to let large number of muslim to know, understand and follow it. This request is made as different Alims and Maulvis aid their own versions and there by distort the message.

I also think Ghamdi sahab makes effort to give a liberal view on things most of the times. I have heard several of his TV dars shows and found him conveniently giving way to openness where ever it was pleasing most.

Aslamau Alaikum, Brothers refrain from any Aalim or so-called scholar who creates doubts about what Allah SWT has mentioned in Q’uran and provided application within Sunnah-e-Rasool (pbuh).
Whether it’s prophet Isa (pbuh) to Khatam-e-Nabawoot, or tafseer of Surah Al Feel, Hijab Ghamdi has twisted facts and cast doubts about Hazreath Ayesha & and Syedna Umar Ibn Khtaab (RAH). This guy is a fitan and any prolong discussion only leads to more confusion. He is financially supported and showcased by primarily liberal Paksitan media and Ahamedis. He denies end of Risallah and supports Ahamdi notion of Nabawath and Ilhamiath. Now for most Muslims who are into Deen, Fiqh or Islamic Sciences can be very easily persuaded by him. Since he hides things under the cover of logic, rationalization. However, our deen tells us otherwise. The wisdom of Islam cannot be justiied by logic or reasoning. Listening, promoting or even giving him a benefit of a doubt is aiding and supporting fitan for which our beloved prophet strictly warned us. What got me very upset is the author or the blogger silly comparison of this fitan to the likes of Imam Abu Hanifah. Brother please give me a break. Ghamdi is misguided DOG who’s constantly barking and creating doubts and misguiding primarily Muslim females. he is supposedly one of most admirable scholar anon Pakistani females.

Ghamidi is not even from the Arabian Ghamidi Tribe. He is just Javed Ahmed from Pakistan who has taken the name Ghamidi to lend authenticity to his personality. He takes salary from a US Intelligence agency and promotes their thinking. He is not even a scholar. Probably translates Jewsih or Orientalists thoughts into urdu. But he has miserably failed in his mission in Pakistan. Where did he get money for living in model town and opening academy there or his main students leading a luxurious lifestyle. No one gives him importance to his legalistic approach anymore. Tahirul Qadri, another western puppet is more popular because of his mass approach. Since Mirza Ghulam Ahmed, these fake Maulanas have been misguiding the people. But true muslims always know that these are paid alims. Have you seen any interview of Javed or his so called students which is not conducted by their follower. They are even afraid of being asked awkward questions by a neutral host. Study his whole thought about freedom from western slavery be it in Afghanistan or Iraq and you will find gems of wisdom from Mirza Ghulam Ahmed Qadiani asking muslims to accept western yoke.

The foolishness of Javed can be found out from the fact that the man prays only Farz prayers and has found some arguments for it. The stupid man does not know that with praying Sunnat and Nawafil in Namaz in addition to Farz increases your closeness to Allah SWT, increases your Imaan and gives you more spiritual strength as well as calms you down. From this alone, we can judge the stupidity of the man who claims to be the greatest reformer in centuries.